QUICKLINK Washington, D.C. · November 20, 2009 · Secret courts
Experts discuss state secrets privilege at forum
Keywords: State secrets privilege
|
|
Experts collaborated and debated “the state of the state secrets privilege” at a forum hosted by American University Washington College of Law on Wednesday.
The school's Collaboration on Government Secrecy brought together scholars, government specialists and policy practitioners to discuss the history of the privilege, its place in the Obama administration, how it would ideally be reformed and how it is likely to be reformed.
New York Congressman Jerrold Nadler, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, kicked off the day by stressing the need to curtail the privilege. Nadler emphasized that the executive cannot be its own judge and noted the need to pass legislation paring back the privilege.
The state secrets privilege requires courts to dismiss lawsuits if the government shows that trying the case would reveal state secrets. Once rarely invoked, the Bush administration created controversy by asserting the privilege in a wide range of cases, from warrantless wiretapping and torture to records of lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s visits to the White House. The Obama Justice Department likewise drew criticism by continuing to assert the privilege, but announced in September that it would limit use of the privilege and narrow its scope.
Sharon Bradford Franklin, senior counsel for the Constitution Project, underscored the need for an independent check on the executive branch.
Legislation to reform the privilege has been introduced in both houses of Congress. Panelists agreed that the bill is likely to move forward only if attached to other legislation. Obama has remained silent on whether or not he supports the bill; President George W. Bush felt such legislation was outside the scope of Congressional authority.
Danielle Brian of the Project on Government Oversight said this is a "unique opportunity" to finally pass legislation on the privilege. "We all need to make this a priority," she said.
The definition of what national security information would appropriately be covered by the privilege has been stretched and construed too broadly, said Liza Goitein, the director of the Liberty and National Security Project at the Brennan Center for Justice. "I'm concerned that now 'national security' means any harm and vast illegal government activity can be concealed."
Goitein argued a balancing test weighing whether information is properly protecting a government secret against the public's interest in the information is appropriate in light of the broad definition.
— Brooke Ericson, 3:49 pm
Comments: (1)
Comment by BDJUSA, Sun, Nov 22, 2009, 3:04pm
This state secret should be explored:
WHY IS THE US GOVERNMENT COVERING UP THE LATEST ISRAELI SPY RING? WHAT WAS THE ISRAELI SPY RING DOING THAT IS SUCH A THREAT TO THE US GOVERNMENT THAT THEY WOULD RATHER HAVE OVER A HUNDRED SPIES ESCAPE THAN RISK A PUBLIC TRIAL?
This may be hard to believe, however, if you go to the FBI's website you will see that Osama bin Laden is wanted for a couple of crimes (flimsy evidence) but not the 911 attacks. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page (30), [Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI] said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.” Obviously the FBI realizes the widely viewed confession tape of Osama bin Laden is phony.
The Dancing Israelis (from Urban Moving Systems) were actually Mossad and Israeli Defense Forces personnel and were seen dancing and celebrating while video taping the first tower being hit. The authorities developed their pictures which showed them rejoicing while holding a lit lighter with the burning twin towers in the background. They were arrested and failed lie detector tests but were let go due to orders from Michael Chertoff. When they returned to Israel they went on a talk show where one of them mentioned they were there to document the event. The confession video is at Youtube and other web pages. How could they have be there to document the event unless they had prior knowledge of the attacks!
"Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information."
-- US official quoted in Carl Cameron's Fox News report on the Israeli spy ring and its connections to 9-11.
Submit a comment
• RSS feed
News categories:
News keywords: