Professor Imwinkelried joins amicus brief in case challenging NSA surveillance program

In Wikimedia Foundation v. National Security Agency, No. 20-1191 (4th Cir.), the plaintiff foundation filed a challenge to an NSA surveillance program that the NSA itself has called "comprehensive." The NSA moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff lacks standing because it cannot demonstrate an injury. In support of its motion, the NSA filed the affidavit of an expert who asserted that “in theory” the NSA could achieve the stated objectives of its "comprehensive" program without collecting Wikimedia communications;  theoretically, the NSA could filter them out before collection.

The plaintiff called an expert who opined that given the architecture of the Internet, it is unlikely that the NSA would filter before collecting.  When the NSA objected to the opinion of Wikimedia's expert, the District Court sustained the objection under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). 

Professor Ed Imwinkelried has joined an amicus brief arguing that the district court's ruling was erroneous.  One of the other amici is Professor David Kaye of Pennsylvania State University, Imwinkelried's longtime co-author on both the McCormick on Evidence treatise and The New Wigmore treatise. 

Professor Imwinkelried is a world-renowned evidence expert who has published extensively in the field.