State Secrets
ACLU Responds to Federal Court Ruling in "State Secrets" Lawsuit About Warrantless Wiretapping (11/16/2007)
SAN FRANCISCO – The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled today that a charity that sued President Bush for engaging in unconstitutional surveillance can pursue its case in court. The Bush administration had asked the appellate court to dismiss the suit on the grounds that the very subject matter of the litigation – the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program – was a state secret. The Ninth Circuit rejected this argument, noting that the government had publicly acknowledged the surveillance program and that senior officials had discussed the program in press conferences and statements....
SAN FRANCISCO – The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled today that a charity that sued President Bush for engaging in unconstitutional surveillance can pursue its case in court. The Bush administration had asked the appellate court to dismiss the suit on the grounds that the very subject matter of the litigation – the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program – was a state secret. The Ninth Circuit rejected this argument, noting that the government had publicly acknowledged the surveillance program and that senior officials had discussed the program in press conferences and statements....
Jameel Jaffer, Director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project, had this to say about the matter:
"As the court properly recognized, the government should not be permitted to shut down litigation simply by asserting that a case implicates state secrets. In the al-Haramain case and many others, it's clear that the executive branch is using the state secrets privilege not to protect legitimate national security information but to shield the government and its agents from accountability for systemic violations of the Constitution. A state secrets privilege that operates in this way serves neither national security nor the country's broader interest in the rule of law."
"As the court properly recognized, the government should not be permitted to shut down litigation simply by asserting that a case implicates state secrets. In the al-Haramain case and many others, it's clear that the executive branch is using the state secrets privilege not to protect legitimate national security information but to shield the government and its agents from accountability for systemic violations of the Constitution. A state secrets privilege that operates in this way serves neither national security nor the country's broader interest in the rule of law."
Here again we're witnessing the ill effects of the "post-9/11 syndrome" that has so corrupted the Cheney/Bush regime in Washington, D.C. The need for some secrecy in chasing down active terrorists is legitimate. Yet for these crooks, the collapse of the Twin Towers in Gotham signalled the collapse of constitutional safeguards for all Americans' civil liberties. They've trampled on the Fourth Amendment so hard, you could be excused for thinking it was effectively revoked!
For six years the Rethugs have pretty much been given carte blanche by the Congress and the Courts to do as they please. This 9th Circuit decision reassures us that at least some of our nation's judiciary hasn't been corrupted into rubber-stamping this budding militarist dictatorship.
For now, I truly believe that we cannot expect our representatives, Republican or Democratic, in D.C., to resist the power of huge telecom corporations and the military-industrial comnbine. We citizens need to squawk loudly in defense of our Bill of Rights! Write not only to Washington, but also to the editor of your local paper... eternal vigilance surely is the price of liberty in our times.
No comments:
Post a Comment