14 replies to this topic

[spy1]

Okay - scratch the judge's chance to do anything one way or the other ( http://news.com.com/...?tag=html.alert ):

http://www.eff.org/n...6_04.php#004613

"Government Moves to Intervene in AT&T Surveillance Case"

DOJ Will Assert Military and State Secrets Privilege and Request Dismissal of Lawsuit

San Francisco - The United States government filed a "Statement of Interest" Friday in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF's) class-action lawsuit against AT&T, announcing that the government would "assert the military and state secrets privilege" and "intervene to seek dismissal" of the case.

EFF's lawsuit accuses AT&T of collaborating with the National Security Agency in its massive surveillance program. EFF's evidence regarding AT&T's dragnet surveillance of its networks, currently filed under seal, includes a declaration by Mark Klein, a retired AT&T telecommunications technician, and several internal AT&T documents. This evidence was bolstered and explained by the expert opinion of J. Scott Marcus, who served as Senior Advisor for Internet Technology to the Federal Communications Commission from July 2001 until July 2005

Much of the evidence in the case is currently under seal, as AT&T claims public release of the documents would expose trade secrets. A hearing on the issue is scheduled for May 17th.

For the full Statement of Interest:
http://www.eff.org/l...of_interest.pdf

For more on EFF's suit:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/ "
___________________________________________________________
You know, even I have trouble believing that the government's actually going to do this and get away with it.

Can we all say "BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA"? Pete

[spy1]

http://news.yahoo.co...DMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

"Motion filed to intervene in AT&T secrets case"

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. government filed a motion on Saturday to intervene and seek dismissal of a lawsuit by a civil liberties group against AT&T Inc. over a federal program to monitor U.S. communications.

....

In its motion seeking intervention, posted on the court's Web site, the government said the interests of the parties in the lawsuit "may well be in the disclosure of state secrets" in their effort to present their claims or defenses.

"Only the United States is in a position to protect against the disclosure of information over which it has asserted the state secrets privilege, and the United States is the only entity properly positioned to explain why continued litigation of the matter threatens the national security," said the motion, dated May 12.

A hearing is scheduled for June 21 before federal Judge Vaughn Walker."

===========================================================

Can't wait to see how this turns out. Pete

[spy1]

In this article: http://www.foxnews.c...,195205,00.html :

"Still, while the government clearly can parlay industry cooperation and technical firepower to grab lots of communications, there's bound to be a limit.

For example, tiny, free voice-over-Internet services likely don't bother to maintain the kinds of call logs that Verizon, BellSouth and AT&T apparently handed over, said Jeff Pulver, an authority on the technology.

Also, social network analysis would appear to be powerless against criminals and terrorists who rely on a multitude of cell phones, payphones, calling cards and Internet cafes.

(Why are we doing this again - if the "terrorists" can so easily bypass it? - Pete)

Then there are more creative ways of getting off the grid. The Madrid train bombings case has revealed that the plotters communicated by sharing one e-mail account and saving messages to each other as drafts that, since they were never sent, didn't traverse the Internet as regular e-mail messages would."

============================================================

Fascinating stuff, isn't it? Pete

[spy1]

https://secure.aclu....nd3mzcs5.app26a

Try letting the FCC know you're quite ticked off about this. It isn't hard, it only takes a minute - and it's lots better than doing nothing at all. Pete

[spy1]

http://news.yahoo.co...DMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

Judge defers decision on US wiretap suit

DETROIT (Reuters) - A federal judge on Monday deferred making an immediate decision on a request that the Bush administration's domestic eavesdropping program be halted as a violation of law.

...

Taylor deferred any ruling. Another hearing is scheduled for July 10." Pete

[spy1]

(From E.F.F Homepage, here - http://www.eff.org/ ) :

"EFF and Government Face Off Over 'State Secrets' in San Francisco Courtroom
On Friday, June 23, at 9:30 a.m., a federal judge in San Francisco will hear oral arguments on the U.S. government's motion to dismiss the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF's) class-action lawsuit against AT&T. EFF's suit accuses the telecom giant of collaborating with the National Security Agency (NSA) in illegal spying on millions of ordinary Americans. The government contends that even if the NSA program is illegal, the lawsuit should not go forward because it might expose state secrets.
Full story, more on EFF's case against AT&T: http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att
June 20, 2006"

========================================================

If the government is successful in having their every illegal act covered by the cloak of "national security", there's not much hope left for us. Pete

[spy1]

http://www.usatoday....06-30-nsa_x.htm

"Lawmakers: NSA database incomplete"

"WASHINGTON — Members of the House and Senate intelligence committees confirm that the National Security Agency has compiled a massive database of domestic phone call records. But some lawmakers also say that cooperation by the nation's telecommunication companies was not as extensive as first reported by USA TODAY on May 11."

============================================================

A good read - check it out. Pete

[spy1]

"EFF's Spying Case Moves Forward - Judge Denies Government's
Motion to Dismiss AT&T Case

In January, EFF filed a lawsuit against AT&T for collaborating
with the NSA in its massive and illegal spying program. Today,
a federal court denied the government's and AT&T's motions to
dismiss the case, allowing EFF's suit to proceed."

==========================================================

Check the links provided on the top of this page: http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/ for details.

Also, this page (the first two items): http://www.eff.org/n...6_07.php#004832

Looks like our last line of defense - federal judges - are holding the line and resisting the pressure to fold or docilely go along with the Executive Branch's "wishes". Pete

[spy1]

http://www.foxnews.c...,204733,00.html

"It might appear that none of the subject matter in this litigation could be considered a secret given that the alleged surveillance programs have been so widely reported in the media," Walker said.

Walker also wrote that he did not see how allowing the lawsuit to continue could threaten national security.

"The compromise between liberty and security remains a difficult one," Walker said. "But dismissing this case at the outset would sacrifice liberty for no apparent enhancement of security."

From this weeks SecrecyNews ( http://www.fas.org/s...recy/index.html ):

"COURT DENIES STATE SECRETS CLAIM IN WIRETAPPING CASE

In a rare judicial denial of an official "state secrets" claim, a
federal court yesterday rejected a government assertion that a
lawsuit against AT&T alleging illegal wiretapping should be dismissed
because it would place state secrets at risk.

In May, Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte formally
asserted the state secrets privilege in support of a motion to
dismiss the lawsuit brought by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

But instead of simply deferring to the executive branch, Judge Vaughn
R. Walker did his own analysis of the matter.

"The first step in determining whether a piece of information
constitutes a 'state secret' is determining whether that information
actually is a 'secret'," he wrote.

He went on to conclude, based on public statements by the President
and other officials, that the state secrets privilege was
inapplicable in this case.

"Because of the public disclosures by the government and AT&T, the
court cannot conclude that merely maintaining this action creates a
'reasonable danger' of harming national security."

"It is important to note that even the state secrets privilege has its
limits. While the court recognizes and respects the executive's
constitutional duty to protect the nation from threats, the court
also takes seriously its constitutional duty to adjudicate the
disputes that come before it.... To defer to a blanket assertion of
secrecy here would be to abdicate that duty...."

http://www.fas.org/s...pting072006.pdf

The court's rejection of unconditional judicial deference is
noteworthy. Although the executive branch's assertion of the state
secrets privilege has been denied on at least four occasions in the
past, those denials seem to have been based on technical defects or
procedural failings rather than a substantial judicial assessment of
the merits of the claim."

===========================================================

Makes me want to stand up and cheer - maybe even elect the judge President (common sense and a "no-bullshit" attitude like that are in extremely short supply these days, and should be rewarded). Pete

[spy1]

http://news.yahoo.co...HNlYwN5bmNhdA--

"US government asks federal court to stop domestic spying lawsuit

SAN FRANCISCO (AFP) - The US government has asked a San Francisco court to quash a lawsuit charging that the Bush administration illegally spied on Americans' phone calls, legal filings showed.

....

However, US Department of Justice attorneys urged the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to derail the proceedings in the interest of national security, an argument rejected by US District Court Judge Vaughn Walker.

....

Lawyers representing the administration of US President George W. Bush told the appellate court in their filing that Walker's decision was wrong and that the case needed to be stopped in the interest of guarding "state secrets."

"The very real possibility exists that further proceedings would risk the disclosure of privileged information and irreparably harm the interests of the United States," US lawyers wrote in the appeal.

"At issue is nothing less than the disclosure of information that might cause exceptionally grave harm to national security."

====================================================

Is anyone actually buying this "argument"? Or is everyone else thinking that the Administration is simply trying desperately to cover its' own rear? And prevent the exposure of something so deep and disturbing to the American people that it would not only impact the party-in-powers' ability to remain in charge in the upcoming elections, but result in wholesale legal action (including impeachment) against all of the current Administrations top officials?

I seriously hope the Ninth Circuit Court doesn't cave on this one. Pete

[spy1]

(Read the rest of the article here -

http://news.yahoo.co...surveillance_dc ) :

"NSA telecom lawsuits sent to California court

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Seventeen lawsuits against U.S. telephone companies for allegedly unlawfully aiding a government spy program have been consolidated into a California federal court, said a ruling made public on Thursday.

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation sent the class-action lawsuits filed in 13 district courts across the country into the Northern District of California before Judge Vaughn Walker, who has already been hearing one of the cases."

[spy1]

(Read the rest of the article here - http://news.yahoo.co...ce_061118170359 ) :

US judge refuses to derail domestic spying case

SAN FRANCISCO (AFP) - A federal judge rejected Friday requests from US government and telecom firm lawyers to immediately freeze domestic spying lawsuits while an appeals court considers whether national security would be threatened in trying them.

In the first case involving the White House's authorization of the top-secret warrantless wiretapping program, San Francisco District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker refused to put on hold the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) suit against telecommunications giant AT&T for its alleged role in the program.

On Friday government and telecoms company lawyers asked Walker to immediately put the EFF-AT&T case on hold while their appeal to a separate court to overturn Walker's July ruling is heard.

But Walker again turned them back, leaving the matter to another December 21 hearing.

"I do think that there are matters we can proceed on regarding these cases," Walker told the dozens of attorneys whose suits were consolidated before him.

Walker outlined matters he wanted addressed before the December 21 hearing, at which rival sides would formally argue whether he should stop the proceedings while the government's appeal was considered. "

[spy1]

http://www.foxnews.c...,234377,00.html

"Feds Urge Appeals Court to Drop Warrantless Surveillance Lawsuit to Protect Security Secrets

....

A secret court was established in the late 1970s to grant warrants for such surveillance, but the Justice Department said it can't always wait for the court to act.

The president and his advisers "have determined that the current threat to the United States demands that signals intelligence be carried out with a speed and methodology that cannot be achieved by seeking judicial approval" through traditional channels, Monday's brief said.

The journalists and other plaintiffs lack standing to sue because secrecy considerations mean that "they cannot show, and the government cannot dispute, that the government has intercepted or likely will intercept their communications," the government brief said.

In a brief filed Nov. 14, the ACLU said that the Bush administration's "sweeping theory of executive power would allow the president to violate any law passed by Congress."

"This theory presents a profound threat to our democratic system," it said.

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has set a Dec. 18 deadline for other interested groups to file their own briefs in the case."

[spy1]

December 18, 2006
Fight to Unseal Critical Evidence in AT&T Surveillance Case

Thursday Hearing on Public Release of Documents

San Francisco - On Thursday, December 21, at 2 p.m., a federal judge in San Francisco will consider requests from media groups to unseal critical evidence in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF's) class-action lawsuit against AT&T.

EFF's suit accuses the telecom giant of collaborating with the National Security Agency (NSA) in illegal spying on millions of ordinary Americans. The sealed evidence includes a declaration by Mark Klein, a retired AT&T telecommunications technician, as well as several internal AT&T documents and portions of a declaration from EFF's expert witness. Some of the evidence was previously released in redacted form, while other evidence is still completely unavailable to the media and the public.

U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker will also consider whether two state court lawsuits against AT&T and Verizon over NSA access to phone records, which were recently transferred to his courtroom, should be transferred back to state court.

WHAT:
Hepting v. AT&T and other NSA telecommunications records lawsuits

WHEN:
2 p.m.
Thursday, December 21

WHERE:
450 Golden Gate Ave., Courtroom 6
San Francisco, CA 94102

For more on EFF's case against AT&T:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/

[spy1]

http://www.eff.org/n...7_02.php#005127

"February 20, 2007
Judge Denies Complete Stay in AT&T Surveillance Case

Government and AT&T Cannot Freeze Proceedings During Appeal

San Francisco - A federal judge today ruled that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) can go forward with elements of its class action lawsuit against AT&T for collaborating with the government on illegal spying in ordinary Americans -- despite the government and AT&T's request to freeze proceedings during an appeal.

In his ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker opened the door to beginning the discovery process, allowing EFF to ask "limited and targeted" questions as long as those questions do not overlap with the issues under consideration in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

"The government wanted to put this case in the deep freeze," said EFF Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl. "Instead, the court has invited us to move forward with some targeted questions. We're glad to accept that invitation, which will allow progress while respecting the government's national security concerns."

Judge Walker also refused to implement a blanket stay on the other telecommunications surveillance cases transferred to his court. He ruled that unless the parties stipulate to a stay, then "defendants will answer or otherwise respond to the complaint" by March 29. Earlier today, Judge Walker denied requests from media groups to unseal critical evidence in the AT&T case.

"We're disappointed that the court did not choose to unseal all of the documents that include or refer to the evidence presented by Mark Klein and our expert, J. Scott Marcus. The government has already agreed that the evidence is neither classified nor a state secret, and is only being held under seal because of AT&T's weak trade secrecy claims," said Cindy Cohn, EFF's Legal Director. "Given that the privacy of millions of Americans is at stake, we strongly believe that the public would benefit from seeing this evidence for themselves."

Judge Walker did grant the media groups' request to intervene, and said he might revisit the unsealing issue at a later date.

For Judge Walker's full order:
http://www.eff.org/l...tayorder220.pdf

For more on EFF's case against AT&T:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/

Judge Refuses to Release Critical Documents in AT&T Surveillance Case

Klein Declaration and Other Internal Documents to Stay Sealed for Now

San Francisco - A federal judge in San Francisco today denied requests from media groups to unseal critical evidence in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF's) class-action lawsuit against AT&T.

EFF's suit accuses the telecom giant of collaborating with the National Security Agency (NSA) in illegal spying on millions of ordinary Americans. The sealed evidence includes a declaration by Mark Klein, a retired AT&T telecommunications technician, as well as several internal AT&T documents and portions of a declaration from EFF's expert witness. Some of the evidence was previously released in redacted form, while other evidence is still completely unavailable to the media and the public.

"We're disappointed that the court did not choose to unseal all of the documents that include or refer to the evidence presented by Mark Klein and our expert, J. Scott Marcus. The government has already agreed that the evidence is neither classified nor a state secret, and is only being held under seal because of AT&T's weak trade secrecy claims," said Cindy Cohn, EFF's Legal Director. "Given that the privacy of millions of Americans is at stake, we strongly believe that the public would benefit from seeing this evidence for themselves."

Today's order is in response to a December hearing on the sealing issue. U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker granted the media groups' request to intervene in the case, and said that he might revisit the unsealing motion at a later date. "