Hi Daniel,
Once state secrets are out in the open and written up
in the newspaper, even, obviously there cannot be a
further recourse to a state secrets doctrine (aside
from any possible criticisms to which the existence of
the doctrine itself could be subject), as they are no
longer, in any respect, secrets (the newspaper is
determinative in the same way that wedding or birth
announcements cannot be sent out after newspaper
publication, as everyone in theory knows). What can
be done about these defences, frivolous and meritless
to the extent that they virtually mock the court, on
the part of AT&T other than to reject them?
There is also the issue around descriptive focus on, what is real and not
real...
"AT&T also argues that all of lawsuit needs to be thrown out
because the government has never admitted to spying on internet traffic
and getting phone records. It has only admitted to wiretapping
overseas communications where one end of the communication belongs to a
person suspected of terrorist links. Since the EFF defendants say they
aren't terrorists or communicate with terrorists, the only part of the
spying that has been admitted -- and thus admissible in court --
doesn't apply to them, AT&T argues. Since the rest of the
purported surveillance is thus secret the case has to be thrown out."
So, when something finally gets challenged - plaintiffs are thrown out mainly
due to singular or non accurate definitions of a charge - which of course makes
things harder...
marc
--- marc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Spying Too Secret For Your Court: AT&T, Gov Tell
Ninth.
AT&T told an appeals court in a written brief Monday
that the case
against it for allegedly helping the government spy
on its customers
should be thrown out, because it cannot defend
itself -- even by showing
a signed order from the government -- without
endangering national
security.
A government brief filed simultaneously backed
AT&T's claims and said a
lower court judge had exceeded his authority by not
dismissing the suit
outright.
Because plaintiffs' entire action rests upon alleged
secret espionage
activities, including an alleged secret espionage
relationship between
AT&T and the Government concerning the alleged
activities, this suit
must be dismissed now as a matter of law," the
government argued in its
brief (.pdf).
The telecom giant and the government are appealing a
June ruling in a
federal district court that allowed the suit brought
by the Electronic
Frontier Foundation against the telecom to proceed,
despite the
government's invocation of a powerful tool called
the "states secrets
privilege," which allows it to have civil cases
dismissed when national
secrets are involved.
California Northern District Court Chief Judge
Vaughn Walker ruled,
however, that since the government had admitted it
was wiretapping
Americans without a warrant and that AT&T had to be
involved, the case
could go forward tentatively. The Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals will
hear the government and AT&Ts' appeal in the coming
months.
Once state secrets are out in the open and written up
in the newspaper, even, obviously there cannot be a
further recourse to a state secrets doctrine (aside
from any possible criticisms to which the existence of
the doctrine itself could be subject), as they are no
longer, in any respect, secrets (the newspaper is
determinative in the same way that wedding or birth
announcements cannot be sent out after newspaper
publication, as everyone in theory knows). What can
be done about these defences, frivolous and meritless
to the extent that they virtually mock the court, on
the part of AT&T other than to reject them?
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/03/its_too_secret_.html
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Daniel C. Boyer
____________________________________________________________________________________
The fish are biting.
Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
