Salim v. Mitchell

Summary

Salim v. Mitchell was a landmark lawsuit filed by the ACLU against psychologists James Elmer Mitchell and John "Bruce" Jessen, who designed and implemented the CIA's post-9/11 torture program. The case resulted in the first-ever settlement in a lawsuit involving CIA torture.

Case Details

Legal Basis

The lawsuit was filed under the Alien Tort Statute for:

• Commission of torture
• Cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment
• Non-consensual human experimentation
• War crimes

Plaintiffs

Gul Rahman (Deceased)

• Afghan refugee living in Pakistan with wife and four daughters
• Made a living selling wood at a refugee camp
• Cause of Death: Hypothermia caused "in part by being forced to sit on the bare concrete floor without pants"
• Contributing Factors: Dehydration, lack of food, immobility due to "short chaining"
• Family never officially notified of death
• Body never returned to family for burial

Suleiman Abdullah Salim

• Fisherman from Tanzania
• Abducted and held for over 5 years
• Released by U.S. military with letter acknowledging he poses no threat to the United States
• Now lives in Zanzibar with wife and young daughter
• Continues to suffer physical and psychological effects of torture

Mohamed Ahmed Ben Soud

• Fled Libya in 1991 to escape Gadhafi's dictatorship
• Captured in 2003 in joint U.S.-Pakistani raid
• Held at two secret CIA prisons in Afghanistan for over 2 years
• Identified James Mitchell as present during torture (forcibly submerged in ice water)
• Freed in 2011 after Gadhafi was deposed
• Now lives with wife and three children

Historic Ruling

In April 2016, Judge Justin Quackenbush made an unprecedented ruling:

Denied the psychologists' motion to dismiss the case

This was significant because:

• Every previous lawsuit about CIA torture had been dismissed before reaching merits
• The government had always successfully invoked "state secrets" privilege
• The Justice Department specifically did NOT invoke state secrets in this case
• The judge ordered 30 days to develop a discovery plan — a first for CIA torture cases

Defense Arguments Rejected

Mitchell and Jessen had argued:

1. "Political Question" - Only executive and legislative branches could decide
2. Government Contractor Immunity - They were immune as government contractors

Both arguments were rejected by the court.

Quotes

"This is a historic win in the fight to hold the people responsible for torture accountable for their despicable and unlawful actions. Thanks to this unprecedented ruling, CIA victims will be able to call their torturers to account in court for the first time." ~ Dror Ladin, ACLU Staff Attorney

Settlement

In August 2017, facing imminent trial, Mitchell and Jessen agreed to an out-of-court settlement. This marked:

• First settlement in a case involving CIA torture
• Confidential terms (amount not publicly disclosed)
• Victory for accountability without full trial

Significance

This case established important precedents:

1. CIA contractors can be held accountable for torture
2. "State secrets" privilege is not absolute
3. Government contractor immunity does not protect torturers
4. Civil suits can proceed against individuals involved in CIA programs
5. Torture victims can achieve some measure of justice through civil courts

Resources

• ACLU Case Documents
• ACLU Darkness Documentary - Features interviews with plaintiff Suleiman Abdullah Salim