Obama administration defends Bush wiretapping

[OhioChick]

IDG News Service - Lawyers from the U.S. Department of Justice and the Electronic Frontier Foundation squared off in a San Francisco courtroom Wednesday over a warrantless wiretapping program instituted by the Bush administration.

The EFF sued the government and officials who implemented the secret program in September in an effort to get the government to stop the practice of recording communications involving U.S. citizens without a federal warrant. The EFF argues that this warrantless wiretapping is illegal, but government lawyers say the lawsuit should be thrown out because it could lead to the disclosure of state secrets.

The judge in the case, Vaughn Walker of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, already heard most of these arguments during an ongoing 2006 suit, Hepting v. AT&T, that also sought to put an end to the program. The EFF brought this second suit, Jewel v. NSA, after Congress passed a law last year that protected telecommunications companies like AT&T from lawsuits over the wiretapping.

On Wednesday, DoJ lawyer Anthony Coppolino argued that federal laws allow people to sue government employees who leak information, but do not let them sue the government itself. Coppolino added that litigating such cases could put state secrets at risk by exposing details of the government's anti-terrorist programs.

More: http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9135575/Obama_administration_defends_Bush_wiretapping

[The Backlash Cometh]

1. I woke up with a sharp stabbing pain between my shoulder blades this morning.

Anybody else?

[Senator]

2. Yes, but it's ok as long as Obama gets "infuriated" again.

From the recent http://www.newsweek.com/id/206300/output/print">Gee, It's Hard To Be Eric thingy:

The first detonation occurred in only the third week of the administration, soon after a Justice lawyer walked into a courtroom in California and argued that a lawsuit, brought by a British detainee who was alleging torture, should have been thrown out on national-security grounds. By invoking the "state secrets" privilege, the lawyer was reaffirming a position staked out by the Bush administration. The move provoked an uproar among liberals and human-rights groups. It also infuriated Obama, who learned about it from the front page of The New York Times. "This is not the way I like to make decisions," he icily told aides, according to two administration officials, who declined to be identified discussing the president's private reactions. White House officials were livid and accused the Justice Department of sandbagging the president. Justice officials countered that they'd notified the White House counsel's office about the position they had planned to take.

Which of course is nonsensical, because if Obama didn't know about the decision and is ostensibly precluded from effecting it, however he might "like to make decisions" shouldn't enter into it.

But as long as he "icily told aides" then he's free from all responsibility I suppose.

--

[Jester Messiah]

3. As I understand it, the DoJ is required to defend the policy until it isn't policy anymore.

So until Obama gets off his ass and changes the policy (HINT HINT, 'bama!) the DoJ will have to keep defending it. Makes me glad that I'm just a humble programmer, it must be hell to be a DoJ lawyer.