[Clips] Judge rules against government in spying lawsuit

R.A. Hettinga rah at shipwright.com
Thu Jul 20 13:03:14 PDT 2006


--- begin forwarded text


  Delivered-To: rah at shipwright.com
  Delivered-To: clips at philodox.com
  Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 15:56:51 -0400
  To: Philodox Clips List <clips at philodox.com>
  From: "R.A. Hettinga" <rah at shipwright.com>
  Subject: [Clips] Judge rules against government in spying lawsuit
  Reply-To: clips-chat at philodox.com
  Sender: clips-bounces at philodox.com


<http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2006/07/20/state/n120253D53.DTL&type=printable>



  Judge rules against government in spying lawsuit

  - By DAVID KRAVETS, AP Legal Affairs Writer

  Thursday, July 20, 2006

  (07-20) 12:51 PDT San Francisco (AP) --

  A federal judge on Thursday rejected a government bid to dismiss a lawsuit
  challenging the Bush administration's domestic spying program, saying it
  failed to qualify as a "state secret" because it had been widely reported.

  U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker said a case could go forward over AT&T's
  alleged involvement in President Bush's surveillance program adopted after
  the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

  "The compromise between liberty and security remains a difficult one,"
  Walker wrote in his ruling. "But dismissing this case at the outset would
  sacrifice liberty for no apparent enhancement of security."

  The government invoked the so-called "state secrets privilege" and said the
  case by Electronic Frontier Foundation should be thrown out because it
  threatens to reveal state secrets and jeopardize the war on terror.

  "It might appear that none of the subject matter in this litigation could
  be considered a secret given that the alleged surveillance programs have
  been so widely reported in the media," Walker said in his ruling.

  The case is one of dozens nationwide against telecoms and the government
  alleging they are illegally intercepting Americans' electronic
  communications without warrants. Thursday's decision was the first to
  address the state secrets defense.

  The Justice Department did not immediately return calls seeking comment.

  The lawsuit by the privacy group tests the constitutionality of Bush's
  asserted wartime powers to eavesdrop on Americans without warrants. The
  government intervened and said that divulging information about any alleged
  collusion between AT&T and the government could subject AT&T employees and
  facilities to attack and would enable terrorists "to communicate more
  securely."

  The legal tactic of state secrets privilege, first recognized by the U.S.
  Supreme Court in a McCarthy-era lawsuit, has been increasingly and
  successfully invoked by federal lawyers seeking to shield the government
  from scrutiny by the courts, from espionage cases and patent disputes to
  routine employment discrimination lawsuits.

  The president confirmed in December that the National Security Agency has
  been conducting warrantless surveillance of calls and e-mails thought to
  involve al-Qaida terrorists if at least one of the parties to the
  communication is outside the United States.

  The administration is mum on whether purely domestic calls and electronic
  communications are being monitored as the suit alleges.

  The suit was brought by EFF on behalf of customers of San Antonio-based
  AT&T. The group accuses the telecom of illegally cooperating with the NSA
  to make communications on AT&T networks available to the spy agency without
  warrants.

  The EFF asked Judge Walker to rule on whether the president possesses
  wartime powers to authorize warrantless eavesdropping in the United States
  without publicly disclosing any classified or sensitive material. The EFF
  charged that AT&T, which neither confirms nor denies the allegations,
  practices "wholesale surveillance" of its customers.

  Walker also declined to dismiss AT&T from the case.

  "AT&T cannot seriously contend that a reasonable entity in its position
  could have believed that the alleged domestic dragnet was legal," Walker
  wrote.

  The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the state secrets defense as recently as
  January, when it rejected an appeal from a former covert CIA officer who
  accused the agency of racial discrimination. And in May, citing the state
  secrets defense, the government urged a federal judge in Virginia to block
  a lawsuit by a German national who says he was illegally held and tortured
  in a CIA-run prison in Afghanistan for four months.

  The Supreme Court first recognized the state secrets doctrine in 1953, when
  it dismissed a lawsuit against the government brought by family members of
  people killed in a plane wreck while testing secret electronic surveillance
  equipment.

  The case is Hepting v. AT&T Inc., 06-0672.


  --
  -----------------
  R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah at ibuc.com>
  The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
  44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
  "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
  [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
  experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
  _______________________________________________
  Clips mailing list
  Clips at philodox.com
  http://www.philodox.com/mailman/listinfo/clips

--- end forwarded text


-- 
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah at ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list