Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: U.S. appeals court orders dismissal of domestic spying suit

  1. #1
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like

    U.S. appeals court orders dismissal of domestic spying suit

    funny...no breaking headlines from CNN this time around....

    [QUOTE][B]U.S. appeals court orders dismissal of domestic spying suit
    The Associated PressPublished: July 6, 2007[/B]

    CINCINNATI: A U.S. appeals court ordered the dismissal Friday of a lawsuit challenging President George W. Bush's domestic spying program, saying the plaintiffs had no standing to sue.

    The ruling marks a legal victory for Bush, who last month suffered a pair of court defeats related to his anti-terror efforts. Those rulings barred the administration from locking up civilians indefinitely as enemy combatants, and another blocking the prosecution of two Guantanamo detainees.

    The 2-1 ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel in Cincinnati vacated a 2006 order by a federal judge in Detroit, who found that the post-Sept. 11 warrantless surveillance aimed at uncovering terrorist activity violated constitutional rights to privacy and free speech and the separation of powers.

    [B]U.S. Circuit Judge Julia Smith Gibbons, one of the two Republican appointees who ruled against the plaintiffs, said they failed to show they were subject to the surveillance.[/B] [I]meanwhile, how many times did the liberal media point out that the federal judge in Detroit who made the original ruling in Septemeber, was a clinton appointee????[/I]

    [B]The court ruling means that if Bush restarts the program, [I]ordinary Americans[/I] will have a much harder time challenging it in court. The court ruled that, unless people can prove they're being eavesdropped on, they will have a hard time suing.[/B] [I]more liberal bias....[/I]

    [B]The dissenting judge, Democratic appointee Ronald Lee Gilman, believed the plaintiffs were within their rights to sue and that it was clear to him the program violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.[/B] [I]ironic how the press now freely mentions the affiliations of those who appointed judges when they obvously disagree with a ruling....[/I]

    Although the Bush administration said in January the program is now overseen by a special federal intelligence court, opponents said that without a court order, the president could resume the spying outside judicial authority at any time. The Justice Department has said the case is moot.

    The American Civil Liberties Union led the lawsuit on behalf of other groups including lawyers, journalists and scholars it says have been handicapped in doing their jobs by the government monitoring.

    Others have filed court challenges to the program; this case proceeded the furthest. If the ACLU does not appeal, the case will be sent back to the U.S. district judge in Michigan for dismissal.

    The ACLU, the White House and the Justice Department did not immediately return calls seeking comment Friday.

    The administration had said it sometimes needed to act without waiting for the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, established by a 1978 law.

    Bush authorized the program in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The ACLU filed suit in January 2006, a month after the program's existence became known publicly.

    The government said the case involves state secrets whose disclosure would threaten national security.

    "The information ... is highly sensitive in nature, and goes to the heart of how the government's foreign intelligence gathering is conducted at a time when the nation is at war with an enemy that has already inflicted devastating damage on the United States by operating through a shadowy terrorist network," a Justice Department brief stated.[/B][/QUOTE]

  2. #2
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Post Thanks / Like
    The ruling by the Federal Judge who tried the case was that the action was illegal. The Appeals Court didn't say the Judge erred in his ruling or that he was wrong in his ruling. All they said was the Plaintiff's lacked standing.

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Montville, NJ
    Posts
    5,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    how do they expect someone to prove that they're being stalked by a top-secret illegal program unless the courts force the gov't to open it up to review/scrutiny like the FISA Act requires?!?

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,281
    Post Thanks / Like
    [IMG]http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u17/jetdawgg/republicans_banana_republic.jpg[/IMG]

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us