The Pressure’s On: Obama DOJ to Argue ‘State Secrets’ Case Monday
Sunday, February 08, 2009 at 10:04 pm
President Obama and new Attorney General Eric Holder Monday will face the first public test of their stated commitments to opening government and ending torture.
Since we first reported in January on the pending court case, Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan, there’s been growing pressure — both from advocacy groups and now also from the mainstream media — on the Obama administration to reverse the course pursued by its predecessor.
The case involves five victims of the Bush administration’s extraordinary rendition policies, who claim they were abducted abroad and sent to foreign countries to be interrogated under torture. With the help of the ACLU, the victims sued Jeppesen Dataplan, the Boeing subsidiary that allegedly helped the CIA carry out its policies. Although they didn’t sue the government, the Bush Justice Department intervened in the case and convinced the court to dismiss it, arguing that the very subject matter of the case — the CIA’s extraordinary rendition program — is a state secret, so allowing the victims their day in court endangers national security.
Last week The New York Times weighed in, calling the Bush administration’s argument that the entire case constitutes one big state secret “preposterous,” and urged Obama to “rethink the government’s position.”
“Should Mr. Obama decide against pursuing criminal cases for the torture and abuse of prisoners, taking any chance of an effective civil case off the table would give a pass to such misconduct and leave its victims without any legal remedy,” wrote The Times’ editorial board. “That certainly does not fit principles that the new president has so often articulated.”
The Los Angeles Times’ editorial board agreed Friday, writing: “we hope the Obama administration lawyers will show up in court Monday and reject the approach of the previous administration, letting the case go forward.”
And a story on NPR’s All Things Considered Sunday also highlighted the case as a test of Obama’s promises for transparency. Ominously, former federal prosecutor David Laufman told NPR’s Ari Shapiro that if the administration hasn’t changed course yet, it’s not likely to do so tomorrow, before a three-judge panel in a federal court of appeals. “It would be pretty unorthodox for a Justice Department lawyer to stand up in court on Monday and for the first time tell the court that it is reversing course,” Laufman said.
If the signs so far aren’t encouraging, critics can take heart that bipartisan advocacy groups like the Constitution Project and a growing number of mainstream media outlets are watching this case closely, and seem intent on holding the new administration to its promises.
18 Comments
Comment posted February 8, 2009 @ 9:26 pm
Has everyone just lost their minds in the mainstream media? Is the 'idea' of a perfect democratic society become such a delusion that people are willing to forget that we live in an imperfect and extremely dangerous world. All it will take, God forbid, is for one preventable terrorist attack to occur by an Islamic extremist 'enemy combatant' for the public to wake up to this reality. Are American lives really worth the risk?? Sacrificing homeland security on the altar of naieve, unbridled idealism is foolishness we can't afford at any juncture in American history.
Comment posted February 8, 2009 @ 9:35 pm
Bush et al should be wearing orange jumpsuits. A working-class person like me would be jailed for stealing a loaf of bread. Our system is teetering on the brink of illegitimacy.
Comment posted February 8, 2009 @ 9:37 pm
If our country isn't the land of the free, what makes you want to fight so hard for it?
Comment posted February 8, 2009 @ 9:39 pm
Couldn't agree more with you. And now that the Obama administration is governing, not campaigning, he will see the need for CIA.
Comment posted February 8, 2009 @ 10:05 pm
Giving people their day in court is certainly not a “perfect democratic society,” and democracy is not an unattainable utopian ideal. We already had a “preventable terrorist attack” by “an Islamic extremist 'enemy combatant'” on 9/11/2001, and yet we the people still want to give everyone their day in court. If this country were run by a fascist government that did not recognize and protect equal rights, and did not give everyone, citizen or not, some amount of respect as a human being, then there would be a great many more terrorist attacks, and most of them by citizens justly overthrowing such a government. Yes, if American lives are worth going to Afghanistan and Iraq, they are certainly worth your imagined “risk” to give everyone their day in court, since the risk to their lives is actually lower than the alternative scenario. Stop living in fear. It makes you look weak and pathetic.
Comment posted February 8, 2009 @ 10:20 pm
Dorin,
Why does asserting “state secrets” (which is unconstitutional) in a case where the Government essentially created an illegal network of prisons where ANYBODY – including Americans – could be secretly detained and tortured make us safe? That's the very definition of a tyrannical government. Your support for it is the real naivete – if it's not an outright admission of your fascist politics. And why the hell do you feel the need to list your MD and MBA on an anonymous message board? You pretentious f__k. You don't deserve the Liberty our Founders gave us. Get the f__k out of America – I suggest Belarus or somewhere you'll be more comfortable with a unitary executive that is free to deprive your Liberty without due process.
“Those who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security.” -Ben Franklin
“And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” -Thomas Jefferson
Comment posted February 8, 2009 @ 10:31 pm
He wouldn't fight for it. A tyrannical government could create a fear of goldfish and he'd be willing to give it unlimited power to fight the evil beasts.
Pingback posted February 9, 2009 @ 4:00 am
[...] See the original post: The Washington Independent » The Pressure’s On: Obama DOJ to Argue … [...]
Comment posted February 9, 2009 @ 4:18 am
Pardon me for interrupting your nightmare, but there is no such thing as a preventable terrorist attack – it sounds more like an oxymoron. It's a figment of unchecked imagination. That's because any disaster can be attributed to being a terrorist attack. I'm surprised no one has yet to claim those geese that flew into the engine intakes of Cactus 1549 were under the direct control of an Al Quida terrorist cell operating near La Guardia. By the way, God doesn't forbid anything. If he did, this would be a different world.
Comment posted February 9, 2009 @ 5:26 am
Has everyone just lost their minds in the mainstream media? Is the 'idea' of a perfect democratic society become such a delusion that people are willing to forget that we live in an imperfect and extremely dangerous world. All it will take, God forbid, is for one preventable terrorist attack to occur by an Islamic extremist 'enemy combatant' for the public to wake up to this reality. Are American lives really worth the risk?? Sacrificing homeland security on the altar of naieve, unbridled idealism is foolishness we can't afford at any juncture in American history.
Comment posted February 9, 2009 @ 5:35 am
Bush et al should be wearing orange jumpsuits. A working-class person like me would be jailed for stealing a loaf of bread. Our system is teetering on the brink of illegitimacy.
Comment posted February 9, 2009 @ 5:37 am
If our country isn't the land of the free, what makes you want to fight so hard for it?
Comment posted February 9, 2009 @ 5:39 am
Couldn't agree more with you. And now that the Obama administration is governing, not campaigning, he will see the need for CIA.
Comment posted February 9, 2009 @ 6:05 am
Giving people their day in court is certainly not a “perfect democratic society,” and democracy is not an unattainable utopian ideal. We already had a “preventable terrorist attack” by “an Islamic extremist 'enemy combatant'” on 9/11/2001, and yet we the people still want to give everyone their day in court. If this country were run by a fascist government that did not recognize and protect equal rights, and did not give everyone, citizen or not, some amount of respect as a human being, then there would be a great many more terrorist attacks, and most of them by citizens justly overthrowing such a government. Yes, if American lives are worth going to Afghanistan and Iraq, they are certainly worth your imagined “risk” to give everyone their day in court, since the risk to their lives is actually lower than the alternative scenario. Stop living in fear. It makes you look weak and pathetic.
Comment posted February 9, 2009 @ 6:20 am
Dorin,
Why does asserting “state secrets” (which is unconstitutional) in a case where the Government essentially created an illegal network of prisons where ANYBODY – including Americans – could be secretly detained and tortured make us safe? That's the very definition of a tyrannical government. Your support for it is the real naivete – if it's not an outright admission of your fascist politics. And why the hell do you feel the need to list your MD and MBA on an anonymous message board? You pretentious f__k. You don't deserve the Liberty our Founders gave us. Get the f__k out of America – I suggest Belarus or somewhere you'll be more comfortable with a unitary executive that is free to deprive your Liberty without due process.
“Those who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security.” -Ben Franklin
“And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” -Thomas Jefferson
Comment posted February 9, 2009 @ 6:31 am
He wouldn't fight for it. A tyrannical government could create a fear of goldfish and he'd be willing to give it unlimited power to fight the evil beasts.
Pingback posted February 9, 2009 @ 12:05 pm
[...] in Daily life, Democrats, Government, Law, Obama administration at 9:05 am by LeisureGuy Daphne Eviatar in the Washington Independent: President Obama and new Attorney General Eric Holder Monday will face the first public test of [...]
Comment posted February 9, 2009 @ 12:18 pm
Pardon me for interrupting your nightmare, but there is no such thing as a preventable terrorist attack – it sounds more like an oxymoron. It's a figment of unchecked imagination. That's because any disaster can be attributed to being a terrorist attack. I'm surprised no one has yet to claim those geese that flew into the engine intakes of Cactus 1549 were under the direct control of an Al Quida terrorist cell operating near La Guardia. By the way, God doesn't forbid anything. If he did, this would be a different world.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
rss