Jeppesen DataPlan, an entity known to anyone familiar with aviation, helped the U.S. government plan flights and logistics for its extraordinary rendition program in the earlier part of this decade. A lawsuit brough by five men who say they were unlawfully rendered to torturing countries was dismissed by a judge who agreed with the Bush Administration's claim of a state secrets privilege. Civil rights activists had hoped that the Obama Administration would somehow change its mind at appeal, and argue the case on its merits in open court. That's not going to happen. Today, the Justice Department -- the Eric Holder / Obama Justice Department -- re-asserted the state secrets privilege in Mohamed et al. v. Jeppesen. This may be disappointing to civil libertarians, but it shouldn't be surprising.
The case is fairly straightforward, and some of the classified details, like what Jeppesen did for the government, are known, having been disclosed by Jane Mayer and others. The CIA used Jeppesen's unit to coordinate the complex travel arrangements that extraordinary rendition implies; which airports would be available when; how to schedule pilots; fuel requirements, etc. Jeppesen would therefore have access to a lot of data that's not in the public domain, including how many renditions there were, which countries were used as transit points -- CIA Black Sites -- and which countries were rendition partners, whether they tortured or not. Jeppesen ostensibly has a lot of information about countries to whom the U.S. legally renders suspects. We know a lot about this stuff, but we don't know everything.
It wouldn't be wise for a new administration to come in, take over a case from a prosecutor, and completely change a legal strategy in mid-course without a more thorough review of the national security implications. And, of course, the invocation itself isn't necessarily an issue; civil libertarians and others who voted for Obama did so with the belief that his judgment and his attorney general would be better stewards of that privilege than President Bush and his attorney generals (and vice president.) Obama certainly never promised Americans that he'd declassify everything, or that the government had to renounce its right to assert a state secrets privilege forever.
According to the Justice Department, AG Holder is reviewing all state secrets claims to make sure they meet certain legal tests.
The ACLU is outraged. Executive Director Patrick Romero said that "[c]andidate Obama ran on a platform that would reform the abuse of state secrets, but President Obama's Justice Department has disappointingly reneged on that important civil liberties issue. If this is a harbinger of things to come, it will be a long and arduous road to give us back an America we can be proud of again."
Disappointing indeed, unless you consider that he's only been president for 15 minutes. I wouldn't be at all suprised if he takes such issues on later. He can only fix so many of 43's messes at once.
He's been President for several weeks, and is irrelevant. He has proven himself to be a liar and an endorser of torture. You are welcome to continue to a fool and believe his words when his actions disprove them, but those of us with IQs above room temperature will not be fooled into believing them again.
Right, Brian. Climb down, Ed. Hasty, panicky moves are for bumblers.
I'm giving him his hundred days, more or less, to live up to the unambiguous profession of Panetta before the senate, that he will eliminate torture, by Americans, and "on behalf of" Americans, ie., proxy torture.
I suspect you are a Ron Paul supporter, Ed, and I gave him $100 my own self. I greatly admire him. But when Glenn Beck asked him about 9/11, he sounded like Peter denying the Lord. "Man I know not what thou sayest!" "Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew."
But I don't disown Ron Paul for his disavowal of 9/11 Truth. He's got x-number of dollars of political capital, and has to spend it the wisest way. It would be a Pyrrhic victory for him to blow it all on the Truther vote.
Likewise, Obama has time to make the shot and get it right. Rushing hastily into virgin territory is a trap, a trap that a lot of Old Rightists would love to see him fall into, because they miss Reagan.
Meanwhile, Glen Greenwald has read this post by Ambinder and concluded that
I'm sorry about not posting the link to Greenwald originally. Here it is: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/02/09/state_secrets/index.html
Edward is totally right. Re Andrew, let me quote another line from Glenn:
Yep, that’s Change He’s Trying to Force Us to Believe In.
And Marc? Sully has admitted he needs to start removing more scales from his eyes. What about you?
Your writing that "[i]t wouldn't be wise for a new administration to come in, take over a case from a prosecutor, and completely change a legal strategy in mid-course without a more thorough review of the national security implications" suggests two things: (1) that you don't understand that the government is the defendant in this proceeding, not a "prosecutor" and (2) that you believe the "national security implications" involved are vastly more complicated than they are, requiring a great deal of study for the Obama DOJ just to get up to speed. They're not. The assertion is fairly straightforward: evidence that the government kidnapped and delivered innocent people to torturers is in the public domain; books have been written about it; so to claim a priori that the whole subject may not be approached by a court, and all cases regarding such a program must be dismissed out of hand, is fatuous. And, for what it's worth, the DOJ could certainly have requested, and would very likely have received, a continuance, had it required one before delivering its opinion at the hearing. It did not request one. It sided wholeheartedly with the vile, indefensible, and utterly un-American position of the Bush administration: that the Executive branch of the U.S. government by brandishing its own self-serving and arbitrary definition of threats to national security may simply avoid being brought to trial ever regarding any actions, even obviously heinous felonies, it doesn't want to answer to in court.
Here, for your edification is the opening of the original response of the ACLU plaintiff-appellants to the Bush DOJ's outrageously broad assertion of immunity on the grounds of national security, the very assertion of immunity the Obama DOJ sided with wholeheartedly yesterday. This is what this case is about:
Sorry to disturb Mr. Ambinder's placid river of denial, but the NYT reported that the DOJ lawyer, in response to the judge who asked, "The change in administrtion has no bearing?" said--
"Thoroughly vetted"? "Authorized positions"?
BTW--I am a member of the ACLU and our executive director is Anthony Romero, not Patrick. And it's "attorneys general"--the plural marker goes on the noun, not the adjective.
To those who are offended by this position of the new DOJ, I sympathize. I too am a sustaining member of ACLU and am glad that Romero is pulling no punches, because the State Secrets Privilege has been a pernicious element in our society since its beginning in the Reynolds case, which was fifty years later proven to be a misuse.
It is my expectation, certainly my earnest hope, that this present injustice held over from the previous criminal regime will ultimately be repudiated by Obama's DOJ. His grace period should not be long.
But a greater fear than that this should fail is that an overly idealistic and insufficiently realistic administration, like that of John Kennedy, should so underestimate the potential reaction of the Deep State, that much good that may yet be done by the Obama/Biden experiment will be cut short and replaced by God knows what. Thankfully, Biden is no LBJ.
I urge Mr. Romero esq. to press Obama relentlessly on these matters, because that is his office as ACLU leader. For my part, I continue to give the president the benefit of the doubt on things that he is entering into late after they are thoroughly damaged, exactly because hasty action is unwise, especially in a tangle of contingencies such as the president's office. The tentacles of every decision are far reaching.
Clinton's greatest troubles (other than the trivial and trumped-up) resulted from hasty moves by his green staff in the first hundred days, viz. Les Aspin's bad call in Mogadishu. I trust Obama will not fall prey to the same. Prudence is pure gold at this stage. All the harm of the last eight years should not overwhelm care and watchfulness — the stakes are too high, and the pile of dishes is too precarious.
The ACLU is a marvelous resource and powerful force in the minds and hearts of all thinking Americans.
That the Obama administration would use the 'state secrets' defense the Bush administration used to obfuscate its dirty deeds is indeed shameful.
Every American should immediately contact his or her Senator and Representative and demand that they hold Eric Holder accountable for this despicable move.
Pardon me . . . I have to go now; it's late and I need to send emails to Senators Hatch and Bennett and Representative Chaffetz.
I realize that I may never succeed in my quest to reach these three, but just as great men and women were driven to discover the New World, settle the West, fly the Atlantic, cross the Pacific, swim the English Channel, conquer Mount Everest, and cure the common cold, I'm driven to reach Republicans.
Wish me luck, willya?
And if you don't hear from me again in 12 hours, you might want to start praying.
Okay?