Detroit Free Press v. Ashcroft was a case that was heard before the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in August 2002.

During the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the US launched an effort to counter terrorist activity, including one to limit those that could attend the deportation hearings of foreign aliens.

[2] Special interest cases were defined as "those where the alien is suspected of having connections to, or information about, terrorist organizations that are plotting against the United States.

Believing this closure to be a violation to First Amendment rights to speech and press, The Detroit News, Detroit Free Press, Metro Times, Haddad, and Michigan Representative John Conyers filed a suit against John Ashcroft, Michael Creppy, and Immigration Judge Elizabeth Hacker (the Government) claiming that the Creppy Directive was unconstitutional.

[1] Haddad, the newspapers' plaintiffs, and Rep. Conyer filed complaints and asserted claims under the following provisions:[1] In response, the Government cited several cases to prove precedent that Congress had broad authority over immigration hearings.

In the court's dicta for Kwock Jan Fat v. White, it warned of the dangers of secret hearings, because they give the government extraordinary power.

Therefore, the court ruled that it could not apply the Creppy Directive and label this case a special interest one in order to close it to the public and press.