[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

The death of Yu Menglong: Political scandal in China (Homo Rape & murder of Actor)

The Pacific Plate Is CRACKING: A Massive Geological Disaster Is Unfolding!

Waste Of The Day: Veterans' Hospital Equipment Is Missing

The Earth Has Been Shaken By 466,742 Earthquakes So Far In 2025

LadyX

Half of the US secret service and every gov't three letter agency wants Trump dead. Tomorrow should be a good show

1963 Chrysler Turbine

3I/ATLAS is Beginning to Reveal What it Truly Is

Deep Intel on the Damning New F-35 Report

CONFIRMED “A 757 did NOT hit the Pentagon on 9/11” says Military witnesses on the scene

NEW: Armed man detained at site of Kirk memorial: Report

$200 Silver Is "VERY ATTAINABLE In Coming Rush" Here's Why - Mike Maloney

Trump’s Project 2025 and Big Tech could put 30% of jobs at risk by 2030

Brigitte Macron is going all the way to a U.S. court to prove she’s actually a woman

China's 'Rocket Artillery 360 Mile Range 990 Pound Warhead

FED's $3.5 Billion Gold Margin Call

France Riots: Battle On Streets Of Paris Intensifies After Macron’s New Move Sparks Renewed Violence

Saudi Arabia Pakistan Defence pact agreement explained | Geopolitical Analysis

Fooling Us Badly With Psyops

The Nobel Prize That Proved Einstein Wrong

Put Castor Oil Here Before Bed – The Results After 7 Days Are Shocking

Sounds Like They're Trying to Get Ghislaine Maxwell out of Prison

Mississippi declared a public health emergency over its infant mortality rate (guess why)

Andy Ngo: ANTIFA is a terrorist organization & Trump will need a lot of help to stop them

America Is Reaching A Boiling Point

The Pandemic Of Fake Psychiatric Diagnoses

This Is How People Actually Use ChatGPT, According To New Research

Texas Man Arrested for Threatening NYC's Mamdani

Man puts down ABC's The View on air

Strong 7.8 quake hits Russia's Kamchatka


Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: Court Rejects Ohio Domestic Spying Suit
Source: Associated Press
URL Source: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... /07/06/national/a072928D76.DTL
Published: Jul 6, 2007
Author: Associated Press
Post Date: 2007-07-06 12:50:29 by Brian S
Keywords: None
Views: 83
Comments: 3

(07-06) 09:41 PDT CINCINNATI (AP) --

A federal appeals court ordered the dismissal Friday of a lawsuit challenging President Bush's domestic spying program, saying the plaintiffs had no standing to sue.

The 2-1 ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel 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.

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.

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.

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.

The decision "insulates the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance activities from judicial review and deprives Americans of any ability to challenge the illegal surveillance of their telephone calls and e-mails," ACLU Legal Director Steven R. Shapiro said in a news release.

The Justice Department did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said, "We have always believed that the District Court's decision declaring the terrorist surveillance program unconstitutional was wrongly decided."

The ACLU is reviewing its options, including taking its challenge to the Supreme Court, Shapiro said.

If the group does not appeal, the case will be sent back to the U.S. district judge in Michigan for dismissal.

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.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Brian S (#0)

Bummer.

Join the Ron Paul Revolution

Lod  posted on  2007-07-06   12:55:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Brian S (#0)

said they failed to show they were subject to the surveillance.

They won't tell you that you were under surveillance, hence you cannot show you were subject to any.

Sweet.

So Bush wins another one.

swarthyguy  posted on  2007-07-06   15:43:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Brian S, Christine, Diana, Zipporah, robin, Zoroaster, BTP Holdings, Arator, Bayonne, A K A Stone, Bub, mugwort, bluegrass, Bill D Berger, FormerLurker, Uncle Bill, Dakmar, Flintlock, Neil McIver, tom007, aristeides, Burkeman1, Diana (#0)

Let's see, If I don't have a busted skull, I can't file a court action against institutionalized police brutality.

Okay!

(It's that simple!)


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2007-07-06   18:18:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]