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

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-226 next last
To: <1/1,000,000th%

Have we released all the papers on the Kennedy assassination, which were being held out of sensitivity to the family?


51 posted on 02/16/2006 11:49:42 AM PST by w1andsodidwe (Jimmy Carter allowed radical Islam to get a foothold in Iran.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
Now we're fighting wars via the courts?!?!?  Outrage!  The judiciary joins the legislature in a p!$$ing contest against the Executive branch.  Sorry, but the Executive wields the power in fighting wars -- Commander in Chief, remember?  They'd better go to the Supreme Court and get this overturned.
52 posted on 02/16/2006 11:49:53 AM PST by Pirate21 (The liberal media are as sheep clearing the path along which they will be lead to the slaughter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: omega4179
When are people going to wake up and realize this is a WAR.

people you are at war with have NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

basically the liberals are saying that the President has the power to nuke a city of millions anytime he wants.. but he can't wiretap their phone calls without a warrant!
53 posted on 02/16/2006 11:50:05 AM PST by conservative physics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

This is a separation of powers issue.

They should never have appeared in court in the first place. It only made it seem as if the court were the arbiter.

The proper answer would be:

NO.


54 posted on 02/16/2006 11:50:29 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservative physics; Borges
While there is some debate as to whether or not Jackson actually said it, the phrase attributed to him is

"John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it."

55 posted on 02/16/2006 11:51:15 AM PST by COEXERJ145 (Pat Buchanan lost a family member in the holocaust. The man fell out of a guard tower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145

It should be noted that in the case Jackson was reffering to (a broken treaty with indians) he was in the wrong. I hate when people cite that quote as a symbol of anything poisitive.


56 posted on 02/16/2006 11:52:25 AM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145

thanks for the correction.


57 posted on 02/16/2006 11:52:31 AM PST by conservative physics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

ping


58 posted on 02/16/2006 11:52:37 AM PST by Chicos_Bail_Bonds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

We've found another Al-Qaeda cell and it is, again, in our judicial system.


59 posted on 02/16/2006 11:53:09 AM PST by caisson71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
Yes, the ACLU suit was merged with the EPIC one.

From the decision:

Setup:
In response to this news, EPIC submitted four FOIA requests that same day to four DOJ
components—the Office of the Attorney General (“OAG”), the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review (“OIPR”), the Office of Legal Counsel (“OLC”), and the Office of Legal Policy (“OLP”)—citing the New York Times article and requesting records “from September 11, 2001 to the present concerning a presidential order or directive authorizing the National Security Agency (‘NSA’), or any other component of the intelligence community, to conduct domestic surveillance without the prior authorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (‘FISC’).”

EPIC specifically sought the following items:
(1) an audit of NSA domestic surveillance activities;
(2) guidance or a “checklist” to help decide whether probable cause exists to monitor an individual’s communications;
(3) communications concerning the use of information obtained through NSA domestic surveillance as the basis for DOJ surveillance applications to the FISC;
and
(4) legal memoranda, opinions or statements concerning increased domestic surveillance, including one authored by John C. Yoo shortly after September 11, 2001 discussing the potential for warrantless use of enhanced electronic surveillance techniques.

No reference to 'who' would be harmed, just implied, I guess, that it is in the publics interest since that's what FOIA requests are about.

60 posted on 02/16/2006 11:54:33 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 40 | View Replies]

To: MarneyK

I'd love to know his reasoning because their are many on the right as well as the left that believe that the entire FISA law may be unconstitutional.


61 posted on 02/16/2006 11:54:56 AM PST by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: popdonnelly

His pants are full!


62 posted on 02/16/2006 11:55:19 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 46 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

Looks to me like they want the whole NSA program revealed, unless I read it wrong.


63 posted on 02/16/2006 11:56:29 AM PST by hipaatwo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Borges
The judicial branch can't order the executive branch to fight a war a certain way anymore than the executive branch can order the judicial branch to render a decision a certain way on a case.

Co- Equal means one has no authority over the other.
64 posted on 02/16/2006 11:56:55 AM PST by conservative physics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
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.

And the WHOLE COUNTRY will suffer irreparable harm if these NATIONAL SECURITY documents are released

What is he Stuck On Stupid?

65 posted on 02/16/2006 11:57:29 AM PST by Mo1 (Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists.. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

I believe your right. "OPEN GOVERNMENT"


66 posted on 02/16/2006 11:57:52 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 63 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

It only says the ACLU


67 posted on 02/16/2006 11:59:31 AM PST by Mo1 (Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists.. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: conservative physics
Well The Executive Branch is liable to legal action and such matters are decided by the Judicial. Not to say this was the correct decision but you can't make a blanket statement that they have no authority over them at all. Constitutional matters are decided by the Judicial Branch. As for what the Executive can do to the Judicial...appoint them.
68 posted on 02/16/2006 12:00:02 PM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Borges

True, in that case Jackson was in the wrong but there are time such a statement is absolutely correct.


69 posted on 02/16/2006 12:00:20 PM PST by COEXERJ145 (Pat Buchanan lost a family member in the holocaust. The man fell out of a guard tower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

And the WHOLE COUNTRY will suffer irreparable harm if these NATIONAL SECURITY documents are released



Bears repeating! Perfectly said.


70 posted on 02/16/2006 12:01:41 PM PST by hipaatwo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: MarneyK

HE IS WRONG.


71 posted on 02/16/2006 12:02:21 PM PST by jveritas (Hate can never win elections.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth; eyespysomething

Rose Law Firm, Attorneys at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas, Corporate Law, Litigation

Address:http://www.roselawfirm.com/

Don't think so, unless it's called the Rose Law firm and is headquartered in Little Rock AR.


72 posted on 02/16/2006 12:02:36 PM PST by txrangerette ("We are fighting al-Qaeda, NOT Aunt Sadie"...Dick Cheney commenting on the wiretaps!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

EPIC's Reference Page on its NSA FOIA Request

http://www.epic.org/privacy/nsa/foia/default.html <- Clickee Here
73 posted on 02/16/2006 12:03:06 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy said a private group will suffer irreparable harm

...yea, like the Al Quida operatives and their abettors.

74 posted on 02/16/2006 12:03:22 PM PST by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
What is this judge trying to do is in the pay of the terrorist? I think so. The judiciary is out of control and think they control the country so I guess they do. Good by freedom and hello dictatorship, by black robed tyrants.
75 posted on 02/16/2006 12:03:27 PM PST by YOUGOTIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
Looks to me like they want the whole NSA program revealed, unless I read it wrong.

Looks like that to me also

76 posted on 02/16/2006 12:04:25 PM PST by Mo1 (Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists.. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth

Well, why don't we just take out an ad:

Dear Al Qaeda,
We will no longer wiretape you or try to trace your money or activities.

Sincerely,
The United States


77 posted on 02/16/2006 12:04:39 PM PST by Peach (Hillary ran over a cop and didn't even stop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
>>>...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. <<<

List of Witheld NSA Documents:
1. All
End of List

78 posted on 02/16/2006 12:04:49 PM PST by HardStarboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #79 Removed by Moderator

To: hipaatwo

"The Justice Department failed to meet the time restraints under FOIA"

===

How can the FOIA apply to highly classified material?!


80 posted on 02/16/2006 12:06:48 PM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Consolidated cases -  

ELECTRONIC PRIVACY
INFORMATION CENTER,
Plaintiff,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Defendant.

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Defendant.

 

EPIC - Civil Action 06-00096 (HHK)

ACLU - Civil Action 06-00214 (HHK)

Footnote 1: After EPIC filed its motion for a preliminary 1 injunction, the court consolidated this case with American Civil Liberties Union, et al. v. Department of Justice, Civil Action No. 06-214. By that case, plaintiffs seek “the release of records related to the NSA’s secret surveillance program to intercept, without prior judicial authorization, the telephone and Internet communications of people inside the United States.” Compl. ¶ 2.
This memorandum opinion is concerned solely with EPIC’s motion for a preliminary
injunction. 

 

This order is for EPIC, true. But guess who gets their wish next. Three guesses and the first two don't count. 

81 posted on 02/16/2006 12:06:52 PM 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 67 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

Yeah, I googled some and saw nothing.


82 posted on 02/16/2006 12:07:39 PM PST by eyespysomething (Iran is like the slightly retarded cousin that keeps asking Santa for a shotgun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: HardStarboard

"a private group may be harmed"

Want to bet that group is somehow connected with donations to HILLPAC.

Ralph Neas - I had to erase the comment I was making about him, but needless to say it had to do with hell and his entrance there....


83 posted on 02/16/2006 12:09:43 PM PST by princess leah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: LibFreeUSA

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

===


Close, the ACLU.

From another article:


"In a joint action last week, the nonprofit National Security Archives and the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit alleging that the Justice Department violated the Freedom of Information Act by not providing them with documents about the program requested in separate Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) filings last year. The plaintiffs subsequently requested that their suit be consolidated with two nearly identical ones filed recently by the Electronic Privacy Information Clearinghouse (EPIC). District Court Judge Henry H. Kennedy Jr. granted the request. "

http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&itemid=2818


84 posted on 02/16/2006 12:10:30 PM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: neodad

Was there any question?

http://www.theleagueonline.org/alumni_spotlight.php?submit=detail&uid=178


85 posted on 02/16/2006 12:10:46 PM PST by BJClinton (Let slip the Viking Kittens!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Borges
constitutional matters are only decided by the Judaical because they claimed that right, not because it was constitutionally granted to them.

The President nor congress is bound to follow any order if that order infringes on their constitutionally granted rights.
86 posted on 02/16/2006 12:11:34 PM PST by conservative physics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: MarneyK

Hipaa here is the problem with your former teacher..
"Epstein says he has no problem with the President going to Congress and insisting that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act be streamlined,"
FISA is not constitutional. When have courts EVER given Congress the right to conduct foreign intelligence operations? Never. Which branch have the courts said has not only the inherent right but also the core power to conduct foreign intelligence operations? The executive. And yes so long as the president is convinced the supreme court would not reach a different verdict he not only has the constitutional right but the actual duty NOT to follow any law he believes unconstitutional (carter should have screened the FISA act before he signed it). Hell go back to the original writing of the FISA act. You'll see they even have a paragraph that says the supreme court may have a different opinion then the congress.
"but not surveillance of conversations involving domestic persons." look at the Hamdi case. The AUMF authorized the president to use all military force. The supreme court decided that taking POW's, even if U.S citizens, is a necessary part of warfare (and more intrusive then easedropping). So is collecting intelligence on the enemy, even more so when dealing with terrorists. Again it is the purpose of getting the information. If you bug a call that has one u.s domestic person for non foreign intel reasons you have major problems. But so long as the goal is to gather foreign intel court after court after court has said its the presidents right.
In the end these papers are from justice, not the NSA so I truely don't see where anyone is suffering irrepable harm. Nor do I see what harm it will do releasing the legal justifications for the program.


87 posted on 02/16/2006 12:11:37 PM PST by mykpfsu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
How can the FOIA apply to highly classified material?!

Because a Clinton appointed Judge says so ??

88 posted on 02/16/2006 12:12:06 PM PST by Mo1 (Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists.. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: MarneyK

They have never been challenged in the context now being discussed ie. infringment of exclusive Executive power to wage war. Site me a holding that states otherwise but I don't believe you will find one.Courts historically have been extremely deferential to the Executive branch in matters such as this and I personally believe that SCOTUS would decide similarly.


89 posted on 02/16/2006 12:12:33 PM PST by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas; Mo1

About EPIC

EPIC is a public interest research center in Washington, D.C. It was established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging civil liberties issues and to protect privacy, the First Amendment, and constitutional values.

EPIC publishes an award-winning e-mail and online newsletter on civil liberties in the information age – the EPIC Alert. We also publish reports and even books about privacy, open government, free speech, and other important topics related to civil liberties.

We have no clients, no customers, and no shareholders. We need your support.

http://www.epic.org/epic/about.html


90 posted on 02/16/2006 12:13:01 PM PST by hipaatwo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Peach....I fear that the New York Times has effectively done just that.


91 posted on 02/16/2006 12:19:19 PM PST by Txsleuth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: demlosers

Very funny, but how about just the words "the, a, an, from, to , by, if, when, where, who, as, or, and, not" be not redacted?


92 posted on 02/16/2006 12:21:06 PM PST by LesbianThespianGymnasticMidget (God punishes Conservatives by making them argue with fools.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: MarneyK
but probably the most brilliant legal scholar I know

O.K....but he's got his context wrong. This surveillance isn't a legal action designed to collect information for a court case. This is collecting military and diplomatic intelligence on foreigners, some of whom call people who happen to be in the United States.

Also, on what authority does any U.S. court give a warrant to monitor communications by someone in Germany? ...Can they authorize it just because they call someone in the U.S.? And if they authorize it, who is authorized? The FBI (which conducts domestic surveillance)? The FBI is not the NSA - which IS authorized to conduct foreign surveillance.

I also expect that he is, as most Americans are, unfamiliar with how hot wars are conducted. After all, our last major legal experience with such an enemy that was capable of attacking the mainland U.S. was before most Americans reached adulthood (They'd be at least 82). As such, we instinctively view questions such as warrants and detentions from the viewpoint of criminal prosecutions.

93 posted on 02/16/2006 12:21:22 PM PST by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Semper Paratus

"You have made your ruling....now enforce it!" Andrew Jackson


94 posted on 02/16/2006 12:23:00 PM PST by cartoonistx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145
"John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it."

Actually, I think two quotes were mixed: The one you cite, and a quote about the Popes battallions/divisions.

95 posted on 02/16/2006 12:23:16 PM PST by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

http://www.epic.org/epic/staff_and_board.html



EPIC Board and Staff
EPIC Board of Directors
Oscar Gandy, Chair [bio]
Marc Rotenberg, President [bio]
Deborah Hurley, Secretary [bio]
Barbara Simons, Treasurer [bio]
Whitfield Diffie [bio]
Peter Neumann [bio]

EPIC Staff


96 posted on 02/16/2006 12:24:40 PM PST by Mo1 (Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists.. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

I am not an attorney, but I found a copy of the actual text of the FOIA and even right in there it says that it doesn't apply to material that is classified for national security reasons, so how can the idiot judge rule that they should be released?!

http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foia_updates/Vol_XVII_4/page2.htm



"This section does not apply to matters that are--

(1)(A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact properly classified pursuant to such Executive order; "


97 posted on 02/16/2006 12:24:49 PM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

Nullification. Bush should simply refuse.


98 posted on 02/16/2006 12:25:06 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo
Evidently they have a broader agenda to support, just not individuals specifically. They are against secrecy in government but evidently its okay in other areas. Examples from their home page:

EPIC Supports Privacy for WHOIS Records
In comments to the ICANN on the "Preliminary Task Force Report on the Purpose of Whois," EPIC has urged the adoption of a policy that would make Whois data (the listing of those who register Internet domains) only available to "provide information . . . related to the configuration of the records associated with the domain name within a DNS nameserver." EPIC cited the original purpose of Whois and the growing risk of identity theft. EPIC specifically opposed a proposal that would make Whois data available for broader purposes, such as law enforcement and copyright investigations. More information at EPIC Whois and Identity Theft pages. (Feb. 13)

SSNs, Other Data Should Be Scrubbed from Court Files
In comments to the federal judiciary, EPIC called for changes to procedural rules to shield personal information in court files from commercial data brokers. Commercial data brokers employ stringers to harvest personal information from court files, and then resell the information. Court files are becoming the fuel for dossier-building on Americans, and courts must accept the responsibility for shielding data from misuse. For more information, see EPIC's Public Records and Commercial Data Broker Pages. (Feb. 15)

Oh yeah, these too -

BREAKING NEWS: Court Orders Justice Department to Release NSA Surveillance Documents in EPIC Lawsuit
In response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit (pdf) filed by EPIC, a federal judge has ordered (pdf) the Department of Justice to process and release documents related to the Bush Administration's warrantless surveillance program by March 8. It is the first court opinion addressing the controversial domestic spying operation. "President Bush has invited meaningful debate about the warrantless surveillance program," U.S. District Judge Henry H. Kennedy wrote. "That can only occur if DOJ processes [EPIC's] FOIA requests in a timely fashion and releases the information sought." For more information, see EPIC's Domestic Surveillance FOIA page.

American Bar Association Says Unlawful Surveillance Should Stop
A new report (pdf) from the American Bar Association calls on the President to abide by constitutional checks and balances, and to end electronic surveillance inside the United States that does not comply with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The Association overwhelmingly supported the report, which also urged the Congress to undertake comprehensive investigations. More information at the EPIC FISA page. (Feb. 15)

99 posted on 02/16/2006 12:25:42 PM 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 90 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

Marc Rotenberg, Executive Director

(snip)
He served as Counsel to Senator Patrick J. Leahy on the Senate Judiciary Committee after graduation from law school. He is the recipient of several awards, including the World Technology Award in Law.


100 posted on 02/16/2006 12:26:02 PM PST by Mo1 (Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists.. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 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