The US Supreme Court has overturned one of the criminal convictions against former Twitter employee Ahmad Abouammo, saying federal prosecutors brought the obstruction case in the wrong jurisdiction. The unanimous decision focused on constitutional rules regarding where a defendant should be tried and did not affect several other convictions linked to the case.
Court Says Trial Was Held in the Wrong State
In its ruling, the Supreme Court determined that the obstruction charge should have been prosecuted in Washington state rather than California. According to the justices, the alleged act of creating a false document to hinder an FBI investigation took place while Abouammo was living in Seattle.
Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the court, stated that criminal cases involving falsified documents must be tried where the documents were actually created. Because the alleged conduct occurred in Washington, the conviction obtained in California could not stand.
Other Convictions Remain in Place
Although the obstruction conviction was overturned, the decision does not impact other charges against Abouammo. He was previously convicted on counts related to acting as an unregistered foreign agent and committing fraud.
Federal prosecutors alleged that while working for Twitter between 2013 and 2015, Abouammo provided private information about Saudi dissidents to a Saudi official. In return, authorities said he received expensive gifts and cash payments.
After leaving the company and relocating to Seattle, Abouammo was interviewed by FBI agents. Investigators claimed he later created a fake invoice to support his explanation regarding the payments, leading to the obstruction charge.
Defense Welcomes Supreme Court Decision
Abouammo’s legal team welcomed the ruling, saying it reinforces constitutional protections governing criminal prosecutions. The former Twitter employee had been sentenced to three and a half years in prison but was released in 2025 while his appeal was under review.
The Supreme Court’s decision highlights the importance of proper venue rules in federal cases and clarifies that prosecutors must bring charges in the location where the alleged crime occurred.
