The highest US court on Monday upheld a ban on humanitarian aid or advice to groups that are deemed terrorist organizations by the US government.
In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court said a federal ban on providing "material support" to US-designated terrorist groups, including advice or money for peaceful or legal activities, was lawful under the US Constitution.
The US has designated dozens of groups around the world as terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Hezbollah, barring US organizations from offering any form of support. President Barack Obama has backed the law as a critical tool in the war against terrorism.
Humanitarian groups have said they should be allowed to provide support for these organizations' non-violent activities under US free-speech guarantees. But the Supreme Court argued that aid even for peaceful aims could free up resources for their terrorist arms.
"The taint of their violent activities is so great that working in coordination with them or at their command legitimizes and furthers their terrorist means," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote on behalf of the majority. "Moreover, material support meant to promote peaceable, lawful conduct can be diverted to advance terrorism in multiple ways."
The specific case before the Supreme Court was brought by the Humanitarian Law Project and other domestic aid groups. It involved legal and political advice given to the Kurdish independence group Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and Sri Lanka's Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.
DPA
In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court said a federal ban on providing "material support" to US-designated terrorist groups, including advice or money for peaceful or legal activities, was lawful under the US Constitution.
The US has designated dozens of groups around the world as terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Hezbollah, barring US organizations from offering any form of support. President Barack Obama has backed the law as a critical tool in the war against terrorism.
Humanitarian groups have said they should be allowed to provide support for these organizations' non-violent activities under US free-speech guarantees. But the Supreme Court argued that aid even for peaceful aims could free up resources for their terrorist arms.
"The taint of their violent activities is so great that working in coordination with them or at their command legitimizes and furthers their terrorist means," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote on behalf of the majority. "Moreover, material support meant to promote peaceable, lawful conduct can be diverted to advance terrorism in multiple ways."
The specific case before the Supreme Court was brought by the Humanitarian Law Project and other domestic aid groups. It involved legal and political advice given to the Kurdish independence group Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and Sri Lanka's Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.
DPA
