Golden Gate University Law Review


Micah Wyatt


This Comment argues that §1189 is unconstitutional because it deprives accused terrorist organizations due process under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Section I will provide an explanation of §1189 and §2339B and their effect on both an organization and its supporters. Section II will provide a brief overview of the Due Process Clause in the context of administrative proceedings. Section III will show how §1189 deprives organizations due process under the Fifth Amendment because the statute does not include the most fundamental requirements of procedural due process. Section III(A) will address the initial question of whether organizations are entitled to due process protection. Section III(B) will compare the requirements of the Due Process Clause with the statute as it is written. Section III(C) will look at the additional protections the courts have read into the statute. Section III(D) will show why, even with these additional protections, the statute is missing a vital component of procedural due process-an unbiased adjudicator. Finally, section IV will show that under the United States Supreme Court's current framework for analyzing the requirements of procedural due process, §1189 is unconstitutional and should be amended to include an unbiased and neutral decisionmaker to adjudicate an accused organization's opposition.