Ashcroft v. Iqbal

Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc.

Holding that plaintiffs who curtailed their recreational activities on a river due to reasonable concerns about the effect of pollutant discharges into that river had standing

Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA

Holding no standing existed where alleged injury was "based on hypothetical future harm that is not certainly impending."

Riley v. California

Holding that an employee had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the call records and text messages contained on a cell phone owned by his employer because he "had a right to exclude others from using the phone" and explaining that "a property interest in the item searched is only one factor in the analysis, and lack thereof is not dispositive"

List v. Driehaus

Holding that injury was imminent because plaintiffs demonstrated that enforcement actions took place 20 to 80 times each year and thus "are not a rare occurrence"

Warth v. Seldin

Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"

Katz v. United States

Holding that failure to recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy in a telephone booth would "ignore the vital role that the public telephone has come to play in private communication"

Rakas v. Illinois

Holding that the determinative question is "whether the person who claims the protection of the Amendment has a legitimate expectation of privacy in the invaded place"

Thornburgh v. Abbott

Holding that the factors set forth in Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, apply to the regulation of incoming mail

Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Section 2510 - Definitions

Defining "[i]nvestigative or law enforcement officer" as an officer "empowered by law to conduct investigations of or to make arrests for [certain] offenses . . . and any attorney authorized by law to prosecute or participate in the prosecution of such offenses"

Section 1801 - Definitions

Explaining that lawful permanent residents are included in "United States persons"

Section 1806 - Use of information

Allowing in camera , ex parte review of the legality of electronic surveillance under FISA Subchapter I if "the Attorney General files an affidavit under oath that disclosure or an adversary hearing would harm the national security of the United States"

Section 1804 - Applications for court orders

Authorizing electronic surveillance under FISA

Section 1805 - Issuance of order

Requiring "probable cause to believe . . . the target of the electronic surveillance is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power"

Section 1881a - Procedures for targeting certain persons outside the United States other than United States persons

Permitting review of FISA orders by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court

Section 1803 - Designation of judges

Section 1809 - Criminal sanctions

Prohibiting electronic surveillance under color of law, but providing a defense to "a law enforcement or investigative officer engaged in the course of his official duties" conducting electronic surveillance per a search warrant or court order

Section 1881e - Use of information acquired under this subchapter

Stating that information acquired under § 702 is subject to the notice requirement in § 1806(c)