White House Demands Spy Lawsuit Dismissal

[Robbien]

San Francisco, Calif. (KCBS) -- A federal judge in San Francisco is hearing oral arguments on the U.S. government's motion to dismiss the Electronic Frontier Foundation's class-action lawsuit against AT&T.

KCBS' Bob Melrose is at the courthouse. He explained the lawsuit, filed on behalf of several AT&T customers, challenges the Bush Administration's electronic, domestic spying program and could test the reach of the president's office.

The Administration argues that the courts can not decide the constitutionality of the president's asserted wartime powers to eavesdrop on Americans without warrants.

The San Francisco-based EFF filed a class-action lawsuit against AT&T in January of 2006, accusing the telecommunications giant of illegally cooperating with the National Security Agency to make communications on the company's networks available to the agency without warrants.

The government contends that even if the NSA program is illegal, the lawsuit should not go forward because it might expose state secrets in the war on terror.

http://kcbs.com/pages/49729.php

[ThomCat]

1. I hope the judge issues a scathing opinion on this.

If this motion stands then there is no obstacle to corruption. Any lawsuit could be dismissed simply because the state claims that state secrets would be revealed.

The more corruption there is, the more secrets there are that could be revealed. We have to find a way to make sure that "State Secrets" can't be used to shield corruption from the law.

[IChing]

2. "The government contends that even if the NSA program is illegal"

the lawsuit should not go forward because it might expose state secrets in the war on terror.


OK, so with that legal rational means that every citizen has the right to break the law.
The constitution is circumvent to "the war on terror", unfucking believable .

[ashling]

3. It gives people the false impression that there

are actually co-equal branches, checks and balances, and all that subversive stuff :sarcasm:

The Administration argues that the courts can not decide the constitutionality of the president's asserted wartime powers to eavesdrop on Americans without warrants.

[havocmom]

4. Tell Alberto: Fuck you ...

... strong message to follow.

[Imalittleteapot]

5. ditto

[1monster]

6. When my son was in elementary school, they used to have something

called Topsy Turvey Day or Opposite Day. They would do everything backwards, like wear a shirt inside out and backwards. Everything was opposite to what it is supposed to be.

It feels like the Bush Admin, the Congress, and the Courts have been playing Topsey Turvey Day with us since November 7, 2000.

Isn't it time for them to be told

GAME OVER

[Vidar]

7. Bush like Rummy not subject to laws like ordinary mortals.

[mom cat]

8. Shit. This will all end up in the Bush packed Supreme Court.

[jaysunb]

11. I hope it does

and I hope it's after we take back Congress, so we can start a serious discussion about impeaching several of this assholes. :evilfrown:

[Rex]

9. Demands, demands!

How dare anyone challenge the BFEE! Dogs!

[jazzjunkysue]

10. Wouldn't load. What do we know about the sisko judge?

Hope he's not an evangelical or corporatist.