USA v. Merchant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------x
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
-against-
ASIF MERCHANT,
Defendant.
------------------------------------x
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
24-CR-362(EK)
ERIC KOMITEE, United States District Judge:
Currently pending before the Court are the
government’s motion for an anonymous jury and defendant
Merchant’s request for the use of a questionnaire in jury
selection. 	The government requests that the names, addresses,
and workplaces of the venire and the petit jury not be revealed
to the parties. 	Merchant requests that potential jurors be
asked 127 specific written questions.
For the reasons set forth below, the government’s
motion is granted; Merchant’s is granted in part.
I. 	Background
On September 10, 2024, a grand jury sitting in this
district charged Merchant with attempt to commit an act of
terrorism transcending national boundaries, in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 2332b, and murder for hire, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 1958(a). 	Indictment, ECF No. 16. 	Trial is currently
scheduled to begin on February 23, 2026.
Case 1:24-cr-00362-EK-JRC Document 98 Filed 01/29/26 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
II. 	Discussion
A. 	Anonymous Jury
“A district court may order the empaneling of an
anonymous jury upon (a) concluding that there is strong reason
to believe the jury needs protection, and (b) taking reasonable
precautions to minimize any prejudicial effects on the defendant
and to ensure that his fundamental rights are protected.”
United States v. Kadir, 718 F.3d 115, 120 (2d Cir. 2013).
Several attributes of this case favor anonymity.
First, this case arises against a relatively fraught background.
In announcing the charges, the government alleged that Merchant
had “close ties to Iran” and that the murder-for-hire scheme was
“straight out of the Iranian regime’s playbook.” 	Pakistani
National with Ties to Iran Charged in Connection with Foiled
Plot to Assassinate a Politician or U.S. Government Official,
U.S. Dep’t of Justice (Sept. 11, 2024).1 	Since that time, the
government has indicated that it may not seek to introduce
evidence of such “ties” at trial. 	ECF No. 81, at 3-4. 	Still,
given the nature of the charges, and the current tensions with
Iran, anonymity will serve to protect the judicial process.
Anonymous juries are appropriate in “situation[s] in which a
1 https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/pakistani-national-ties-iran-
charged-connection-foiled-plot-assassinate-politician-or-us-0 (last accessed
Jan. 29, 2026) [https://perma.cc/9RLX-JK76].
Case 1:24-cr-00362-EK-JRC Document 98 Filed 01/29/26 Page 2 of 9 PageID #:
<pageID>

3
jury faces real or threatened violence.” 	United States v.
Mostafa, 7 F. Supp. 3d 334, 338 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (emphasis
added). 	A juror under fear that “he [or] family may be
subjected to violence or death at the hands of a defendant or
his friends” cannot be expected to possess “judgment . . . as
free and impartial as the Constitution requires.” 	United States
v. Barnes, 604 F.2d 121, 140–41 (2d Cir. 1979). 	This case
arises at a time when the United States and Iran are deploying
increasingly threatening rhetoric towards one another. 	Jaroslav
Lukiv and Kathryn Armstrong, Trump Warns Iran “Time Is Running
Out” for Nuclear Deal as US Military Builds Up in Gulf, 	Brit.
Broadcasting Corp. (Jan. 28, 2026);2 Shayan Sardarizadeh et al.,
Iran Warns it Will Retaliate if US Attacks, as Hundreds Killed
in Protests, Brit. Broadcasting Corp. (Jan. 11, 2026);3 Hollie
Silverman and Gabe Whisnant, Iran State TV Threatens Donald
Trump — “Bullet Won’t Miss,” Newsweek (Jan. 14, 2026).4 	Thus,
potential jurors may understandably feel significant fear of
violence or retaliation as a result of their participation in
the proceedings. 	And even a juror’s “general fear of
retaliation could well affect [her] ability to render a fair and
2 https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly5pd459gko (last accessed Jan. 29,
2026) [https://perma.cc/9U8W-8FPP].
3 https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2jek15m8no (last accessed Jan. 29,
2026) [https://perma.cc/HYF7-GS76].
4 https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-iran-war-protests-state-tv-
bullet-11360973 (last accessed Jan. 29, 2026) [https://perma.cc/92RW-ED7W].
Case 1:24-cr-00362-EK-JRC Document 98 Filed 01/29/26 Page 3 of 9 PageID #:
<pageID>

4
impartial verdict.” 	United States v. Thomas, 757 F.2d 1359,
1364 (2d Cir. 1985) (emphasis added). 	Anonymity will ensure
jurors “feel[] less pressure” and avoid a “possible mental
block[] against impartiality.” 	Barnes, 604 F.2d at 141.
The severity of the charges in this case also militate
in favor of an anonymous jury. 	The Second Circuit has affirmed
the use of anonymous juries where, among other factors, the
defendant has been charged with “serious crimes of terrorism,”
including conspiracy to murder in a foreign country. 	United
States v. Kaziu, 559 F. App’x 32, 37 (2d Cir. 2014) (citing
Kadir, 718 F.3d at 121); see also United States v. Kandic, No.
17-CR-449, 2021 WL 5505832, at *3-4 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 24, 2021)
(adopting anonymous jury in case involving defendant charged
with providing material support to Islamic State via social
media). 	Here, Merchant has been charged with an attempted act
of terrorism transcending national boundaries and murder-for-
hire for his alleged plotting. 	The government intends to
present evidence that Merchant “plotted to kill a United States
politician at a political rally open to the public and that he
described having the killer fire from the crowd.” 	Gov’t Reply
3, ECF No. 87. 	Thus, the charges raise a “reasonable likelihood
that the pervasive issue of terrorism would raise in the jurors’
minds a fear for their individual safety.” 	United States v.
Stewart, 590 F.3d 93, 125 (2d Cir. 2008).
Case 1:24-cr-00362-EK-JRC Document 98 Filed 01/29/26 Page 4 of 9 PageID #:
<pageID>

5
Additionally, there has been wide-spread media
coverage of the case already, which will only increase as we
approach trial. 	E.g., Ken Dilanian et al., Pakistani Man
Charged with Murder-for-Hire Plot Against U.S. Politicians,
Potentially Including Trump, NBC News (Aug. 6, 2024);5 Aaron
Katersky, Suspect Pleads Not Guilty in Alleged Murder-for-Hire
Plot Against Donald Trump, ABC News (Sept. 16, 2024).6 	Expected
trial publicity weighs in favor of anonymity to avoid the
jurors’ exposure “to inappropriate contacts that could
compromise the trial.” 	United States v. Paccione, 949 F.2d
1183, 1193 (2d Cir. 1991).
Appropriate precautions will ensure Merchant is not
prejudiced by anonymity. 	These may include “conduct[ing] a
careful voir dire designed to uncover any bias as to the issues
or the defendant[] and tak[ing] care to give the jurors a
plausible and nonprejudicial reason for not disclosing their
identities.” 	United States v. Aulicino, 44 F.3d 1102, 1116 (2d
Cir. 1995). 	The Court is contemplating, for example,
instructing jurors that the reason for their anonymity is the
significant media interest in this case, and that anonymous
5 https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/pakistani-man-charged-murder-
plot-us-politicians-potentially-trump-rcna165433 (last accessed Jan. 29,
2026) [https://perma.cc/6R8P-7EWM].
6 https://abcnews.go.com/US/suspect-alleged-plot-assassinate-trump-
plea/story?id=113737458 (last accessed Jan. 29, 2026) [https://perma.cc/D5TW-
HS3Q].
Case 1:24-cr-00362-EK-JRC Document 98 Filed 01/29/26 Page 5 of 9 PageID #:
<pageID>

6
juries are not an unusual practice. 	The Second Circuit has
endorsed such explanations as non-prejudicial. 	See Kadir, 718
F.3d at 120–21 (affirming district court’s specification “in the
questionnaire that . . . given the media interest in the case,
anonymity would protect the jurors’ ‘rights of privacy’ and
assist them ‘in discharging their responsibility as jurors
independently, fairly and impartially’”); United States v. Thai,
29 F.3d 785, 801 (2d Cir. 1994) (affirming district court’s
introduction to questionnaire that “selecting an anonymous jury
is not an unusual practice and has been followed in many cases
in Federal Court”).
The Court will also take steps to ensure an effective
voir dire. 	For one, the Court (or magistrate judge, should
Merchant consent) will be providing potential jurors with a
questionnaire, with input from both parties. 	This questionnaire
will allow Merchant “a basis to conduct adequate voir dire and
to probe any prospective jurors’ potential biases.” 	Kaziu, 559
F. App’x at 38; see also United States v. Pica, 692 F.3d 79, 88
(2d Cir. 2012) (endorsing as a precaution “a detailed
questionnaire” in a case with an anonymous jury “drafted with
input from defense counsel”).
Case 1:24-cr-00362-EK-JRC Document 98 Filed 01/29/26 Page 6 of 9 PageID #:
<pageID>

7
B. 	Juror Questionnaire
However, the Court will use a significantly shorter
questionnaire.7 	Merchant’s proposed questionnaire includes 127
questions, ECF No. 79-2, many with multiple sub-parts, and this
proposal is far longer than what judges have employed in other
terrorism cases in this district. 	See, e.g., Kaziu, 559 F.
App’x at 38 (thirty questions); Jury Questionnaire, United
States v. Al-Farekh, 15-CR-268 (E.D.N.Y. July 27, 2017) (sixty-
eight questions). 	Such length increases the risk that a juror
“understand written questions differently from those who
drafted” them and may hinder the questionnaire’s purpose.
United States v. Treacy, 639 F.3d 32, 47 (2d Cir. 2011).
To aid the Court in preparing the questionnaire,
defense counsel is respectfully directed to send a word-
processing file of his proposed questionnaire to Chambers
consistent with Rule II.C. of this Court’s Individual Rules and
Practices by 2:00 P.M. on January 30. 	The Court will then
circulate a proposed annotation of Merchant’s submission. 	After
reviewing the Court’s annotation, if the parties would like to
7 Specifically, the Court is planning on deleting questions 2-7, 15, 27-
28, 31, 33-34, 37, 39-40, 44-46, 57, 62-63, 66, 69, 72-75, 82-86, 91-104, and
112. 	The Court will also shorten other questions. 	Of course, should a
magistrate judge conduct jury selection, he or she will remain free to add
additional questions. 	The questionnaire will also include preliminary
instructions and a summary of the case as determined by the Court (or
magistrate judge).
Case 1:24-cr-00362-EK-JRC Document 98 Filed 01/29/26 Page 7 of 9 PageID #:
<pageID>

8
call the Court’s attention to a small number of questions that
they believe are essential, they should submit these questions
via letters to the Court, and why, by the close of business on
Tuesday, February 3. 	The government may also indicate
objections to a small number of questions that it does not
believe should be included.
Given that it remains an open question whether either
party will be presenting evidence regarding the actions or
directions of a foreign government, both parties should also
indicate their views on whether questions related to foreign
governments should be included. 	Both parties should also
address whether they expect disclosing the names of the
potential targets of the alleged scheme.
III. 	Conclusion
For the reasons set forth above, the government’s
motion for an anonymous jury is granted, and the defendant’s
Case 1:24-cr-00362-EK-JRC Document 98 Filed 01/29/26 Page 8 of 9 PageID #:
<pageID>

9
motion to compel the use of a jury questionnaire is granted in
part.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Eric Komitee
ERIC KOMITEE
United States District Judge
Dated: 	January 29, 2026
Brooklyn, New York
Case 1:24-cr-00362-EK-JRC Document 98 Filed 01/29/26 Page 9 of 9 PageID #:
<pageID>