A federal judge has ruled that at least one provision of the USA Patriot Act is unconstitutional. A U.S. District Judge in California ruled that the U.S. Patriot Act’s ban on providing "expert advice or assistance" to foreign terrorist groups is unconstitutionally vague, in violation of the First and Fifth Amendments. This is the first federal court decision finding any portion of the Patriot Act illegal. The judge’s decision did not include a nationwide injunction on the provision as sought by the plaintiffs. The California case involves five groups and two U.S. citizens who are trying to provide support for lawful, nonviolent activities on behalf of Kurdish refugees in Turkey. These groups aim to help find a peaceful resolution of the Kurds' campaign for self-determination in Turkey, but under the anti–terrorism law have been threatened with 15 years imprisonment. Numerous groups have criticized the law as overreaching legislation that infringes on the rights and civil liberties of citizens. The court decision lends credence to the numerous cities and towns that have passed laws opposing the U.S. Patriot Act. New York City is the most recent city to pass such a resolution. On Feb. 4 the New York City Council approved a resolution condemning the law as unpatriotic for infringing on privacy rights. Another case challenging the Patriot Act is currently pending in Detroit. The plaintiff, the American Civil Liberties Union, argues that the Patriot Act grants the federal government unconstitutional authority to secretly seize library reading lists and other personal records. The California ruling could be the first of many in which the judicial branch of government acts as a check and balance against the excessive law passed by an overly zealous legislature.