Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Major defeat for Bush/Obama position on secrecy

  1. #1
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    33,488

    Default Major defeat for Bush/Obama position on secrecy

    Major defeat for Bush/Obama position on secrecy


    The first sign that the Obama DOJ would replicate many of the worst and most radical arguments of the Bush DOJ was in the Jeppesen case, a lawsuit brought by five victims of the CIA's rendition and torture program (including Binyam Mohamed). The Bush administration had argued that the entire "subject matter" raised by the lawsuit (the rendition program) was such a gravely important "state secret" that the court could not consider any lawsuit relating to that issue. That argument was a by-product of one of the Bush DOJ's most controversial actions: its radical expansion of the "state secrets" doctrine. Whereas that privilege was once an evidentiary privilege enabling the Government to declare specific documents too secret to use in litigation, the Bush DOJ converted it into an all-purpose shield allowing them to have entire lawsuits dismissed even where the lawsuit alleged that the President's conduct was illegal.

    The District Court in Jeppesen had accepted the Bush DOJ's argument and dismissed the lawsuit, and on appeal in February, the Obama DOJ -- to the obvious surprise of the judges and in a reversal of everything Democrats claimed they believed during the Bush presidency -- told the Ninth Circuit panel that they embrace the Bush DOJ "state secrets" position in full (a position they've since repeated in other cases).

    Today, in a 26-page ruling (.pdf), the appellate court resoundingly rejected the Bush/Obama position, holding that the "state secrets" privilege -- except in extremely rare circumstances not applicable here -- does not entitle the Government to demand dismissal of an entire lawsuit based on the assertion that the "subject matter" of the lawsuit is a state secret. Instead, the privilege only allows the Government to make specific claims of secrecy with regard to specific documents and other facts -- exactly how the privilege was virtually always used before the Bush and Obama DOJs sought to expand it into a vast weapon of immunity from all lawsuits challenging the legality of any executive branch program relating to national security

    In rejecting this radical secrecy theory, the court emphasized how the Bush/Obama doctrine, if accepted, would essentially place the President above and beyond the rule of law:



    Read that last sentence -- that, said the court, is the power of lawlessness which the Obama administration was attempting to preserve for itself.

    Critically, the court went on to note that the Government's interests in maintaining secrecy "is not the only weighty constitutional values at stake." Quoting the Supreme Court's language in Boumediene -- which in 2008 declared unconstitutional the Military Commission Act's attempt to abolish habeas corpus -- the court today noted that equally imperative for the court is to preserve "freedom's first principles [including] freedom from arbitrary and unlawful restraint and the personal liberty that is secured by adherence to the separation of powers." The court concluded that applying the secrecy privilege on a document-by-document basis, rather than allowing the Government to abuse the privilege to bar citizens from vindicating their legal rights in court, preserves all of those competing interests. In short, presidential assertions of secrecy are neither absolute nor supreme.

    Today's decision is a major defeat for the Obama DOJ's efforts to preserve for itself the radically expanded secrecy powers invented by the Bush DOJ to shield itself from all judicial scrutiny. Given how Obama recently emphasized how committed he is to defending government secrecy powers in court, it it highly likely the Obama DOJ will attempt to appeal this ruling further -- to a full 9th Circuit panel and/or to the Supreme Court -- but in the meantime, the case will return to the District Court for a document-by-document assessment of what is and is not truly "secret" (and the court today held that a mere decision by the President to classify certain documents is insufficient; the court is required to exercise independent judgment as to whether secrecy is truly warranted). Finally, these 5 torture victims will have their day in court.
    * * * * *
    I'll have an interview posted shortly with the ACLU's Ben Wizner, lead counsel for the plaintiffs in this case.

    Major defeat for Bush/Obama position on secrecy - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com
    It's no longer a dog whistle, it's a fucking trombone


    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  2. #2
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    GOOD, stupid retard Obama for continuing this shit

    i want this around his fucking neck like an anchor until he loses
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  3. #3
    Elite Member Just Kill Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    sucking on a blow pop and playing with electrodes
    Posts
    15,550

    Default

    Oooooh the state secrets thing.
    KILLING ME WON'T BRING BACK YOUR GOD DAMNED HONEY!!!!!!!!!!

    Come on, let's have lots of drinks.

    Fuck you all, I'm going viral.

  4. #4
    Elite Member kingcap72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    10 miles from Pootie Tang
    Posts
    21,909

    Default

    This is a good thing. The state secrecy tactic was bullshit from the word go.

  5. #5
    Silver Member chattykathy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    477

    Default

    "demands and limits of the law" Limits/laws are there for a reason, EVERYONE has to respect them, even the CIA.
    ""Somebody needs to talk to Alex Castellanos: he may not be doing sex right if he thinks an Obama speech is 'like sex'."~ Rush Limbaugh

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. President Obama overturns George Bush records secrecy order
    By buttmunch in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: March 3rd, 2009, 03:27 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 2nd, 2009, 05:45 PM
  3. Barack Obama addresses 'major threat' to economy
    By kingcap72 in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: September 17th, 2008, 02:28 AM
  4. Bush terror bill signing a major victory
    By Sojiita in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: October 19th, 2006, 04:47 PM
  5. New Bush/Blair revelations? CAll in the secrecy gag rule
    By buttmunch in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: November 25th, 2005, 09:56 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •