Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge orders NSA spy papers released
CNN ^

Posted on 02/16/2006 11:23:39 AM PST by hipaatwo

A federal judge dealt a setback to the Bush administration on its warrantless surveillance program, ordering the Justice Department on Thursday to release documents about the highly classified effort within 20 days or compile a list of what it is withholding.

U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy said a private group will suffer irreparable harm if the documents it has been seeking since December are not processed promptly under the Freedom of Information Act.

The Justice Department failed to meet the time restraints under FOIA and failed to make a case that it was impractical to deal quickly with the request by the Electronic Privacy Information Center.

Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller said no determination has been made as to what the government's next step will be.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: aclu; foia; henrykennedy; judgehenrykennedy; kennedy; nsa; patriotleak; spying; surveillance; treason
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-226 next last

1 posted on 02/16/2006 11:23:40 AM PST by hipaatwo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

Out of control!


2 posted on 02/16/2006 11:24:40 AM PST by sully777 (What would Brian Boitano do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

Without looking, is it a Clinton apointee?


3 posted on 02/16/2006 11:26:16 AM PST by neodad (Why does every cartoon article refer to the "Prophet" Muhammed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

So go to a sane judge higher up the food chain.


4 posted on 02/16/2006 11:26:34 AM PST by MNJohnnie ("Close the UN, Keep Gitmo!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

Clinton appointee.

Judge Henry H. Kennedy, Jr.

Judge Kennedy was appointed to the U.S. District Court in September 1997. He graduated from Princeton University in 1970 and received a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1973. Following graduation, he worked for a short time for the law firm of Reavis, Pogue, Neal and Rose, then served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Columbia from 1973 to 1976.

From 1976 to 1979 he served as a United States Magistrate for the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. In December 1979, he was appointed Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, where he served until his appointment to the federal bench.

Chambers: (202) 354-3350


5 posted on 02/16/2006 11:26:39 AM PST by Mr. Brightside (I know what I like.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

Does the justice department really have to take orders from the Judicial branch?


6 posted on 02/16/2006 11:26:43 AM PST by kerryusama04 (The Bill of Rights is not occupation specific.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

Sounds like this "request for spying information" was filed on behalf of Al-Qaeda.


7 posted on 02/16/2006 11:26:46 AM PST by LibFreeUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
"Judge orders NSA spy papers released"

Fat chance!!

8 posted on 02/16/2006 11:26:59 AM PST by davisfh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

"a private group will suffer irreparable harm "

Who are they?


9 posted on 02/16/2006 11:27:27 AM PST by wmileo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sully777

Judge Kennedy was appointed to the U.S. District Court in September 1997 by Bill Clinton.


10 posted on 02/16/2006 11:27:43 AM PST by Y2Bogus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

I want to know what "private group will suffer irreperable harm"..if this information isn't released.

He better not be talking about the terrorists...


11 posted on 02/16/2006 11:28:07 AM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: hipaatwo

Unconstitutional Order!


13 posted on 02/16/2006 11:28:24 AM PST by Semper Paratus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kerryusama04

They can appeal it until it reaches the US Supreme Court. They do not have to abide by the ruling of this traitor judge.


14 posted on 02/16/2006 11:28:28 AM PST by jveritas (Hate can never win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
Clinton appointee. Sorry thinking out loud. It will be interesting to see if the AG 'does as told' or immediately appeals to the next level.
15 posted on 02/16/2006 11:28:56 AM PST by K-oneTexas (I'm not a judge and there ain't enough of me to be a jury. (Zell Miller, A National Party No More))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

This will be undone.


16 posted on 02/16/2006 11:29:20 AM PST by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wmileo
Convicted felons who believe they were convicted on NSA eavesdropping.
17 posted on 02/16/2006 11:29:53 AM PST by K-oneTexas (I'm not a judge and there ain't enough of me to be a jury. (Zell Miller, A National Party No More))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Semper Paratus
Unconstitutional Order!

Agreed.

This judge should be prosecuted for sedition, IMO.
18 posted on 02/16/2006 11:29:55 AM PST by Pox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

But FDR's secret files still can't be released after he framed the Pearl Harbor commanders.


19 posted on 02/16/2006 11:30:07 AM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

I think they should just skip all the charades and start blowing up buildings themselves instead of waiting for the terrorists to do it.

Really, why don't the dems start killing Americans and save themselves some time.


20 posted on 02/16/2006 11:30:13 AM PST by HOTTIEBOY (The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth
The private group is the terrorists ally, so it does not make any difference, the judge, the private group, and the terrorists are all enemies of the United States.
21 posted on 02/16/2006 11:30:14 AM PST by jveritas (Hate can never win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

they had better appeal asap.

exactly which group is suffering harm.. Al Qeada, daily kos crowd or the DNC leadership on a fishing expedition?


22 posted on 02/16/2006 11:30:45 AM PST by BoBToMatoE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
National Security will trump this chump big time...

Just another arrogant twit in a black robe...


23 posted on 02/16/2006 11:30:54 AM PST by darkwing104 (Let's get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
Does this judge have his own army?If so,let him enforce his ruling.If not,let the fool be ignored.(Yes,I know,and file an appeal)
24 posted on 02/16/2006 11:32:25 AM PST by smoothsailing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas

HERE...is the reason that it has been so important for Bush to get as many SCOTUS justices confirmed as possible under his watch...

I have a feeling that these kind of "decisions" will be all too prevalent coming from some of Clinton's judges..


25 posted on 02/16/2006 11:33:22 AM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

That dog's not gonna hunt for long.


26 posted on 02/16/2006 11:33:26 AM PST by xcamel (One should hope Global Dumbing is reversible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

this will be instantly appealed, its obvious who owns this judge.


27 posted on 02/16/2006 11:33:27 AM PST by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing
Does this judge have his own army?

For once I agree with Joe Stalin... "Judge, how many divisions do you have?"

28 posted on 02/16/2006 11:34:35 AM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

The Supreme Court is next I hope.


29 posted on 02/16/2006 11:34:45 AM PST by Dustbunny (Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
highly classified effort

What doesn't this AHOLE understand about the words "highly classified"?

30 posted on 02/16/2006 11:36:09 AM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside

Clinton appointee


SURPRISE!


31 posted on 02/16/2006 11:36:09 AM PST by hipaatwo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside
Reavis, Pogue, Neal and Rose

I wonder if that's the same Rose of the Rose Law Firm of Hillary Clinton fame?

32 posted on 02/16/2006 11:37:09 AM PST by eyespysomething (Iran is like the slightly retarded cousin that keeps asking Santa for a shotgun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt; Bahbah; Mo1; tiredoflaundry; defconw; Peach; onyx; Carolinamom; prairiebreeze; OldFriend; ..

ping a ling


33 posted on 02/16/2006 11:37:18 AM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth

I thinks it's People for the Unamerican Way that's requesting this. I remember reading about it last week but I'm not 100% sure.


34 posted on 02/16/2006 11:38:03 AM PST by hipaatwo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

This is a turf war.

The judges are afraid they will now be bypassed.


Seriously, if the information is not being gathered for a court case there warrents are really not relevant. These judges are confusing the battlefield with the courtroom.

You can't win wars with scottish law.


35 posted on 02/16/2006 11:39:05 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
If I go to JFK for a flight to Heathrow, do you refer to this as a "Domestic Flight"? And, if from Massachusetts I call a friend in Paris... does the phone company bill me for a "Domestic phone call"?

How on earth do 90% of the LSM news reports refer to "Bush's Domestic Spying Program"?

36 posted on 02/16/2006 11:41:57 AM PST by C210N (Bush SPYED, Terrorists DIED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wmileo
Below is Judge Kennedy's decision issued today.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Department of Justice
Civil Action No. 2006-0096
Memorandum Opinion & Order issued February 16, 2006 by Judge Henry H. Kennedy

http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/opinions/2006/Kennedy/2006-CV-96~9:45:49~2-16-2006-a.pdf

 

 

The 2006 opinions of the court: http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/opinions/district-court-2006.html 

37 posted on 02/16/2006 11:42:00 AM PST by K-oneTexas (I'm not a judge and there ain't enough of me to be a jury. (Zell Miller, A National Party No More))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kerryusama04
No the President does not have to take orders from the Judaical Branch, they are co-equal.

As President Lincoln said... the court has ruled, now let them enforce it!

ROFL!
38 posted on 02/16/2006 11:44:29 AM PST by conservative physics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

This is really a bogus decision. When seeking a preliminary injunction (which is what was issued here) the plaintiff not only has to show that they will suffer irreperable harm if the injunction is not granted; they must also show that the threatened harm to them if the injunction is not granted outweights the potential harm to the defendant if the injunction IS granted. Also, the plaintiff must show a substantial likelihood they will prevail on the merits. Now....how could anyone believe that the potential harm to the US if confidential info on the war on terror is disclosed is outweighed by the speculative damage some unknown telephone caller might have sufferd?


39 posted on 02/16/2006 11:44:45 AM PST by joebuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas; Txsleuth

Thanks!


IT'S THE DAMN ACLU!


40 posted on 02/16/2006 11:44:45 AM PST by hipaatwo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside

Does national security mean anything to these people? I mean, the Federal government does have a responsibility to see that its citizens don't get killed by terrorists.


41 posted on 02/16/2006 11:44:58 AM PST by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: eyespysomething

That was the same thing I wondered...the name ROSE just kinda stuck out, didn't it??


42 posted on 02/16/2006 11:45:48 AM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

Federal Judges officially back Al Queda and should be impeached.

no private party is "harmed" by this program. rubbish. rubbish!!!!


43 posted on 02/16/2006 11:45:49 AM PST by omega4179 (minutemanproject)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
NSA: Ok judge, here you go:




*Snicker*

44 posted on 02/16/2006 11:46:49 AM PST by demlosers (Kerry: "Impeach Bush, filibuster Alito, withdraw from Iraq, send U235 to Iran, elect me President!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservative physics

That was President Jackson.


45 posted on 02/16/2006 11:47:31 AM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

Couldn't they have just sent Sandy Berger in to steal the documents?


46 posted on 02/16/2006 11:47:57 AM PST by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: demlosers

Good one!


47 posted on 02/16/2006 11:48:37 AM PST by hipaatwo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas
Thanks for that, saved me having to look it up. Looks like EPIC will get it's "state secret" answer a bit later.

The case doesn't stand for the proposition of WHAT is to be released, only WHEN. Plenty of FOIA requests are answered with a "we can't tell you that."

48 posted on 02/16/2006 11:48:37 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: demlosers

LOL...


49 posted on 02/16/2006 11:49:37 AM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

Comment #50 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-226 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson