Ann Aiken

Infobox Judge


name = Ann Aiken
imagesize =
caption =
office = Judge for the United States District Court for the District of Oregon
termstart = February 4, 1998
termend =
nominator = President Clinton
appointer =
predecessor = James A. Redden
successor =
office2 =
termstart2 =
termend2 =
nominator2 =
appointer2 =
predecessor2 =
successor2 =
birthdate = Birth date and age|1951|12|29|mf=y
birthplace = Salem, Oregon
deathdate =
deathplace =
spouse =

Ann L. Aiken (born December 29, 1951) is a United States District Court judge for the District of Oregon.

Aiken was born in Salem, Oregon and graduated from the University of Oregon in 1974, Rutgers University in 1976, and the University of Oregon School of Law in 1979. She was a district judge in Oregon from 1988 to 1992, a circuit judge in Oregon from 1992 to 1997. President Bill Clinton appointed her to a seat vacated by James A. Redden; Aiken was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on January 28, 1998, receiving her commission on February 4, 1998.

Other positions Aiken held include law clerk for judge Edwin Allen of the Lane County Circuit Court (1979-1980); private practice in Oregon from 1980 to 1982; fundraiser and field staff for Kulongoski for Governor in 1982; chief clerk of the Oregon House of Representatives in 1982-1983; private practice from 1983 to 1988; judge of the Lane County District Court from 1988 to 1992 and judge of the Lane County Circuit Court from 1992 to 1997.

Decisions

On September 26 2007, Judge Aiken declared unconstitutional two portions of the USA PATRIOT Act that deal with the government's power to conduct certain surveillance without first obtaining a warrant. The decision received national attention and came in the case of the Brandon Mayfield lawsuit against the federal government for false detainment following the 2004 Madrid train bombings, in which Mayfield was uninvolved in the bombings. [ [http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/26/patriot.act/index.html Federal judge rules 2 Patriot Act provisions unconstitutional.] CNN, accessed September 27 2007.] In the decision, Aiken held that those provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. [ [http://www.ord.uscourts.gov/rulings/04-cv-1427Opinion.pdf Mayfield v. United States.] Accessed September 27 2007.]

References