Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Civil Liberties
Related: About this forumU.S. defends secrecy of unique surveillance court
Source: Reuters
U.S. defends secrecy of unique surveillance court
WASHINGTON | Fri Jul 5, 2013 6:11pm EDT
(Reuters) - The Obama administration on Friday urged a secret U.S. court that oversees surveillance programs to reject a request by a civil liberties group to see court opinions used to underpin a massive phone records database.
Justice Department lawyers said in papers filed in the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that the court's opinions are a unique exception to the wide access the public typically has to court records in the United States.
If the public had a right to any opinion from the surveillance court, the possible harms would be "real and significant, and, quite frankly, beyond debate," the lawyers wrote, citing earlier rulings from the court.
The American Civil Liberties Union had asked the court last month to release some of its opinions after Britain's Guardian newspaper revealed a massive U.S. government database of daily telephone call data, prompting a worldwide debate about the program's legality.
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
WASHINGTON | Fri Jul 5, 2013 6:11pm EDT
(Reuters) - The Obama administration on Friday urged a secret U.S. court that oversees surveillance programs to reject a request by a civil liberties group to see court opinions used to underpin a massive phone records database.
Justice Department lawyers said in papers filed in the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that the court's opinions are a unique exception to the wide access the public typically has to court records in the United States.
If the public had a right to any opinion from the surveillance court, the possible harms would be "real and significant, and, quite frankly, beyond debate," the lawyers wrote, citing earlier rulings from the court.
The American Civil Liberties Union had asked the court last month to release some of its opinions after Britain's Guardian newspaper revealed a massive U.S. government database of daily telephone call data, prompting a worldwide debate about the program's legality.
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/05/us-usa-security-court-idUSBRE96410B20130705
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 2090 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
U.S. defends secrecy of unique surveillance court (Original Post)
Eugene
Jul 2013
OP
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)1. We're just mushrooms to them... keep us in the dark and feed us bullshit
Downwinder
(12,869 posts)2. How do you cite unpublished rulings?
ExCop-LawStudent
(147 posts)4. In other courts
unpublished rulings are available from Lexis, Westlaw, and Bloomberg Law.
For example:
Anderson v. State, No. 061200200CR, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 7975, 2013 WL 3329027, 2013 BL 172373 (Tex. App.--Texarkana June 28, 2013, no pet. h.) (not designated for publication).
All that an unpublished decision means is that it will not be published in a reporter, such as Southwestern Reporter 3d, and the use as an authority in court pleadings is limited.
They are still released publicly. The secret courts don't release anything, so the public has no idea what is going on.
nebenaube
(3,496 posts)3. It's just another Star Chamber...
Useless and corrupt.