White House invokes privilege in spy cases

[cal04]

The Bush administration has asked federal judges in New York and Michigan to dismiss a pair of lawsuits filed over the National Security Agency's domestic eavesdropping program, saying litigating them would jeopardize state
secrets. In papers filed late Friday, Justice Department lawyers said it would be impossible to defend the legality of the spying program without disclosing classified information that could be of value to suspected terrorists.

National Intelligence Director John Negroponte invoked the state secrets privilege on behalf of the administration, writing that disclosure of such information would cause "exceptionally grave damage" to national security. The administration laid out some of its supporting arguments in classified memos that were filed under seal. The government's motion, widely anticipated, involves two cases challenging an NSA program that allows investigators to eavesdrop on Americans who communicate with people outside the country suspected of terrorist ties.

In New York, the Center for Constitutional Rights has asked a judge to stop the program, saying it was an abuse of presidential power. The American Civil Liberties Unionand other groups filed a similar lawsuit in Detroit. For decades, U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies have been required to seek court approval before using electronic surveillance on Americans. That was not done by the NSA in the program at issue, but President Bushhas said the eavesdropping was made legal by a congressional resolution passed after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Shayana Kadidal, an attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights, called the administration's motion
"undemocratic."

Ample safeguards could be put in place to allow the case to continue without disclosing classified information, he said. The center has also argued that the court already has enough information to decide whether the program was legal. "The Bush administration is trying to crush a very strong case against domestic spying without any evidence or argument," Kadidal said in a written statement. "Can the president tell the courts which cases they can rule on? If so, the courts will never be able to hold the president accountable for breaking the law."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060527/ap_on_go_pr_wh/domestic_spying_lawsuits

[Ravenseye]

1. So basically

"The executive is going to do whatever he wants, and doesn't believe that the laws apply to him as long as he says that it's in the name of fighting terrorism, and if you want to investigate whether what he's doing is wrong, you shouldn't be allowed."

Wow that sounds like a real democracy doesnt it?

Being able to do whatever you want, without conforming to the law, and without any oversight. Yeah that's what the founders intended.

[unhappycamper]

2. ..

[GregD]

3. time to hit the streets folks...

I just don't know what more it will take, and we should have already been out there screaming.