红杏视频

NEW YORK 鈥� Last week, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York a discovery request by an individual sanctioned for violence against Palestinians in the Israeli occupied West Bank that would have undermined established protections for civil society groups and threatened their ability to continue their advocacy work without fear of irreparable harm. The court adopted arguments advanced by the organization targeted by the request, Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), and an amicus brief filed by the 红杏视频 (红杏视频), the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), and Human Rights First.

鈥淭he court鈥檚 decision affirms DAWN鈥檚 right to engage in research, reporting, and advocacy without coercive interference by people who disagree with its speech. NGOs should never be forced to comply with this kind of abusive request, and this decision will allow human rights organizations鈥� work to continue providing accountability for human rights abuses,鈥� said Nathan Freed Wessler, deputy director of the 红杏视频 Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project.

The court found that DAWN did not have to comply with a discovery request filed by Isaac Levi Pilant, dual U.S.-Israeli citizen who was previously under the West Bank sanctions program. DAWN had publicly that the U.S. government impose sanctions on him and others for documented violence against Palestinians. After President Trump effectively the program, Pilant filed an application against DAWN and its executive director, Sarah Leah Whitson, pursuant to a U.S. law that provides a mechanism for foreign litigants to obtain discovery from people and entities in the United States. He sought a court order for an extremely wide set of information related to DAWN鈥檚 investigation of Pilant and its sanctions advocacy efforts for use in a possible future defamation case in Israel against Yesh Din, an Israeli human rights organization.

鈥淭his ruling confirms that foreign litigants cannot exploit our courts to silence NGOs that report on human rights abuses and advocate for accountability,鈥� said Bobby Hodgson, assistant legal director at the NYCLU. 鈥淭he Constitution protects organizations like DAWN from being forced to reveal confidential aspects of their work. The discovery process cannot sidestep the First Amendment 鈥� and we鈥檙e glad the court agrees.鈥�

The court鈥檚 decision reflected the arguments put forth in the supporting amicus brief. The court found that various protections, including the reporter鈥檚 privilege and statutory provisions, barred it from granting the discovery requested. It further found that Pilant had failed to demonstrate how the requested information was relevant to contemplated litigation against a different organization in Israeli court.

As explained in the 红杏视频 and HRF amicus brief, the U.S. government has established frameworks and processes to encourage nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to share sensitive information that can assist it in more effectively implementing various human rights and corruption sanctions and visa restriction programs. Undermining the protections for NGOs to securely and confidentially share this information would not only impact the ability of the U.S. government to use such tools to hold human rights abusers and corrupt actors accountable, but it would also put NGOs, victims of abuse, and others in civil society in jeopardy by opening them up to retaliation and harassment from people they accuse of human rights violations.

The brief further argued that Pilant鈥檚 broad discovery request implicates information protected under the First Amendment and the reporter鈥檚 privilege, which provide grounds to reject his request under the relevant discovery statute.