did, `read the intelligence reports' on Mr. Padilla before purporting to provide legal authority for Mr. Padilla's designation and detention." (Id. at ถ 42.) Yoo also advised executive officials that military detention of an American citizen seized on American soil was lawful because, he claimed, the Fourth Amendment had no application to domestic military operations in this context. (Id. at ถถ 19(a), 21.) Following a meeting of the War Council in July 2002 in which Yoo and fellow Council members "`discussed in great detail how to legally justify' `pressure techniques proposed by the CIA,' including waterboarding, mock burial, and open-handed slapping of suspects, [Yoo] wrote his August 1, 2002 memo, which stated that acts of interrogation would not constitute torture unless they caused pain `equivalent in intensity towho were foreign nationals, alleged that the United States Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA"), working in concert with other government agencies and officials of foreign governments, operated an "extraordinary rendition program" to gather intelligence by apprehending foreign nationals suspected of involvement in terrorist activities and transferring them in secret to foreign countries for detention and interrogation by United States or foreign officials. Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc., 563 F.3d 992, 997 (9th Cir.2009). The United States intervened and asserted that state secrets formed the subject matter of the lawsuit and argued that any suit that contains allegations, "the truth or falsity of which has been classified as secret by a government official," must be dismissed. Id. at 1003. The district court agreed and dismissed the case exclusively because it