Obama Administration Seeks Re-Hearing in Extraordinary Rendition Case

By
Friday, June 12, 2009 at 4:37 pm

After losing its argument before a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that the “state secrets privilege” requires the dismissal of a lawsuit by alleged torture victims, the Obama administration today has asked the full Ninth Circuit to re-hear the case, which was the first challenge to the Bush administration’s “extraordinary rendition” program.

As I’ve written before, Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan involves five victims of CIA rendition, or “torture by proxy” who sued the subsidiary of Boeing that allegedly helped the CIA fly the men, captured abroad, to secret CIA prisons in cooperating countries. Because federal officials are often immune from liability, the men, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, sued the private aviation data company. But the U.S. government, then under President George W. Bush, intervened in the case and argued that allowing it to proceed would endanger national security by revealing information about CIA activities.

Since taking office, of course, President Obama has insisted that the United States no longer engages in or sponsors torture, so the ACLU hoped the new administration would change it’s position. But it hasn’t, and after losing its argument at the federal court of appeals in April, the Justice Department today filed a request with the court to re-hear the case en banc.

Claiming that “the [three-judge] panel has significantly altered the contours of the military and state secrets privilege – a constitutionally-based means by which the Executive protects critical national security information from disclosure,” the government insists that the court’s approach “is flatly inconsistent with decisions of the Supreme Court, this Court, and this Court’s sister circuits on questions of exceptional importance applying the privilege.”

The Department of Justice goes on to emphasize that this decision was not made by some low-level Justice Department functionary, but at the highest levels of government:

We emphasize that the Government’s request for en banc review is based upon the most careful and deliberative consideration, at the highest levels, of all possible alternatives to relying upon the state secrets privilege. [...] In this case, then-Director of the Central Intelligence Agency General Michael Hayden made the expert determination that continued litigation poses an unacceptable risk of disclosing state secrets” and concluded that “no information can be adduced on the public record to establish or refute [plaintiffs’] claims, or any defenses thereto, without jeopardizing the national security of the United States.”

Here’s the ACLU’s response, from staff attorney Ben Wizner:

The Obama administration has now fully embraced the Bush administration’s shameful effort to immunize torturers and their enablers from any legal consequences for their actions. The CIA’s rendition and torture program is not a ‘state secret;’ it’s an international scandal. If the Obama administration has its way, no torture victim will ever have his day in court, and future administrations will be free to pursue torture policies without any fear of liability.

Comments

9 Comments

johnhkennedy
Comment posted June 12, 2009 @ 7:33 pm

So sad that Obama has taken the Bush position on so many issues including torture.

It is a struggle to deal with the sellout.

SIGN THE PETITION
To Prosecute Them For Torture

http://ANGRYVOTERS.ORG

Over 250,000 have signed
Join them and call yourself a Patriot


johnhkennedy
Comment posted June 13, 2009 @ 2:33 am

So sad that Obama has taken the Bush position on so many issues including torture.

It is a struggle to deal with the sellout.

SIGN THE PETITION
To Prosecute Them For Torture

http://ANGRYVOTERS.ORG

Over 250,000 have signed
Join them and call yourself a Patriot


Obama supports Bush to the hilt « Later On
Pingback posted June 14, 2009 @ 8:30 pm

[...] in Bush Administration, Government, Law, Obama administration, Torture at 5:29 pm by LeisureGuy Daphne Eviatar in the Washington Independent: After losing its argument before a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that [...]


New states-secret policy coming « Later On
Pingback posted June 17, 2009 @ 3:28 pm

[...] three particular cases — Jewel v. NSA, Al Haramain v. Obama, and Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan — the administration has asked courts to dismiss the cases on the grounds that allowing them to [...]


BokepGratis
Comment posted June 27, 2009 @ 12:31 am

Thanks for sharing….


British Foreign Secretary: Clinton threatened to cut-off intelligence-sharing if torture evidence is disclosed « Dr Nasir Khan
Pingback posted August 1, 2009 @ 6:23 am

[...] Whatever the truth here is about these threats, it is undeniably clear that the U.S. and British Governments are working in collusion to keep concealed the evidence of Mohamed’s torture.  In February, the Obama administration issued a public statement praising the British Government for convincing its High Court to keep these facts concealed and said that this concealment would “preserve the long-standing intelligence sharing relationship that enables both countries to protect their citizens” — certainly an implied threat that the opposite would happen in the event of disclosure.  And in the U.S., the Obama administration has engaged in its own extraordinary efforts to deny Mohamed a day in court, invoking the “state secrets” privilege to argue that the torture program which victimized him must be kept secret, and then after the Obama DOJ lost in the Ninth Circuit, trying to get that decision reversed by the full Circuit court. [...]


joncioschi
Comment posted August 2, 2009 @ 6:13 pm

Thank you, Ms. Eviatar, for your excellent work. Please keep it up.


adidas online
Comment posted June 3, 2010 @ 1:09 am

Thanks for this interesting post,i like it.


British Foreign Secretary: Clinton threatened to cut-off intelligence-sharing if torture evidence is disclosed
Pingback posted January 7, 2011 @ 4:56 pm

[...] Whatever the truth here is about these threats, it is undeniably clear that the U.S. and British Governments are working in collusion to keep concealed the evidence of Mohamed’s torture.  In February, the Obama administration issued a public statement praising the British Government for convincing its High Court to keep these facts concealed and said that this concealment would “preserve the long-standing intelligence sharing relationship that enables both countries to protect their citizens” — certainly an implied threat that the opposite would happen in the event of disclosure.  And in the U.S., the Obama administration has engaged in its own extraordinary efforts to deny Mohamed a day in court, invoking the “state secrets” privilege to argue that the torture program which victimized him must be kept secret, and then after the Obama DOJ lost in the Ninth Circuit, trying to get that decision reversed by the full Circuit court.  [...]


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.