Clapper v. Amnesty International USA

Lawyers, journalists, and human rights researchers (plaintiffs) who regularly communicated with individuals abroad they believed likely targets of government surveillance under FISA sought a declaratory judgment that the statute was unconstitutional, based on an asserted "objectively reasonable likelihood" their own communications would be intercepted, and alternatively on costs they incurred protecting communications from that risk. The court of appeals held the plaintiffs had standing, and the government sought Supreme Court review.