Posted on 12/21/2013 2:41:25 PM PST by Theoria
“The least untruthful thing I could say ....”, you mean that James Clapper?
Then Obama could avoid any litigation based on ‘state secret’?
Isn’t this what he did with Fast and Furious?
Technically, he has to litigate the assertion of state secret, but yeah, if the government wins on that argument, then the plaintiff is out (and so are all similarly situated plaintiffs). Bush's DOJ did that when the government was sued under FISA. Plaintiff had actual evidence of being under surveillance without a warrant, the court ordered the plaintiff to not revel the evidence, and the evidence did not help plaintiff in the case - case was dismissed on state secret grounds. Turns out tthat the part of the law that fines the government for a surveillance violation is completely toothless.
I didn't follow the legal wranglings under Fast and Furious, but use of state secret would be a "natural" there because the government's actions were ostensibly international / foreign affairs.
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.