Supreme Court Hears Cheney Secrecy Case

[tritsofme]

By GINA HOLLAND

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Constitution gives presidents and vice presidents power to gather advice and make decisions without being forced to reveal every detail of how those decisions are made, the Bush administration's top Supreme Court lawyer argued Tuesday.

"This is a case about the separation of powers," Solicitor General Theodore Olson told the justices at the start of lively arguments about privacy in White House policy-making.

The nearly three-year fight over access to records of Vice President Dick Cheney's work on a national energy strategy came to the high court after a federal judge ordered what Olson called a broad, unconstitutional release of White House documents.

The White House is framing the case as a major test of executive power, arguing that the forced disclosure of confidential records intrudes on a president's power to get truthful advice. Environmental and other interest groups claim the records will show whether the energy industry got special access or favors.

Justices were told that former Enron chairman Ken Lay and others were players, but until the government produces records, it won't be clear if they actually drafted the government's policies.

"The question is what happened at those meetings," said Alan Morrison, the attorney for the Sierra Club.

<snip>
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040427/D82791RG1.html

[CO Liberal]

1. Nixon Had To Release His Tapes

Cheney should have to come clean about his energy task force.

[LeftHander]

2. good point....

If the reasoning behind getting the information is form a subpeona then it is for good reason.

[still_one]

3. Clinton had to release notes who they met with on their healthcare plan

[Canuckistanian]

4. Separation of powers? I thought the Sierra Club was a plaintiff.

This is a public right-to-know issue, isn't it?

[ScrewyRabbit]

5. Three guesses as to how Scalila votes...

[Viking12]

6. I think I only need one

Check out this flashtoon :):

http://www.justiceisduckblind.com

[peacetalksforall]

10. As Scalia goes, so goes Thomas.....on his leash.

[Just Me]

7. This administration believes it IS the law!!

"IT" obviously uses political office for personal gain (via flagrant cronyism and kick-backs and paybacks) and does not give a rat's crap about laws designed to put a halt to abuses associated with secrecy or the Federal Advisory Committee Act (precluding secretly allowing nongovernment entities to do government work).

We have right-wing criminals whose attorneys say right-wing crap like, "this is a major test of executive power,...the forced disclosure of confidential records intrudes on a president's power to get truthful advice."

Yup,...it's all about concentrating power in the executive,...no doubt about that,...which is a form of despotism i.e. dictatorship. Gawd, I really hate these anti-democracy, treasonous, power-grabbers!!!

[Richardo]

8. Ironically, if Cheney had just released the list of attendees

...it would be over. That's all the plaintiffs wanted. NOT the minutes or deliberations.

They stonewall just to stonewall. Idiots.

[Democat]

9. What's up with the AP giving Bush the first two paragraphs of the article?

The Associated Press doesn't even tell what the case is about before they print Bush's position twice.

Assholes.

[Timefortruth]

11. According to Scalia said executive privilege is a political question

in which the court should not involve itself!

Isn't determining the outcome of an election a political question that the courts shouldn't involve themselves? This is just bullshit, they are making it up as they go along.

Good God, all the checks and balances put in place by the founding fathers are gone, evaporated. Unbelievable.