DOJ Asks Court for Secrecy In Suit

[G_j]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A64439-2004Sep5?language=printer

DOJ Asks Court for Secrecy In Suit
Case Challenges ID Requirement

Associated Press
Monday, September 6, 2004; Page A09


SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 5 -- The Justice Department has asked an appellate court to keep its arguments secret for a case in which privacy advocate John Gilmore is challenging federal requirements to show identification before boarding an airplane.

A federal statute and other regulations "prohibit the disclosure of sensitive security information, and that is precisely what is alleged to be at issue here," the government said in court papers filed Friday with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Disclosing the restricted information "would be detrimental to the security of transportation," the government wrote.

Attorneys for Gilmore, a San Franciscan who co-founded the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the civil liberties group does not accept the government's argument and that its latest request raises more questions.

"We're dealing with the government's review of a secret law that now they want a secret judicial review for," one of Gilmore's attorneys, James Harrison, said in a telephone interview Sunday. "This administration's use of a secret law is more dangerous to the security of the nation than any external threat."

..more..

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. secret law?

When was it enacted? Or was it ever enacted? Was Congress taken completely out of the loop? Is it the brainchild of Bushco?

[G_j]

2. that is what caught my attention

I wonder how many more of these 'laws' there are.
I guess if you break them, you can go to one of the many 'secret' prisons.

[mumon]

3. In effect, yes.

The law is really present only in its execution.

Now I don't know the details, but typically laws may be written so that executive departments and agencies are empowered to write regulations- think the FCC here.

So I'd suspect it's a case of Justice/FAA being empowered to do certain things by the so-called "Patriot" Act.

[The Stranger]

4. "Secret" law has no validity, no effect, no force, in a word, void.

[Trillo]

5. "prohibit the disclosure of sensitive security information"

Isn't identification an individuals' sensitive security information?

[G_j]

6. that would be the 'Constitutional' take on it

but then the Constitution is just a quaint document, not relevant to Bush's brave new world.

[struggle4progress]

7. kick for the invisible hand making an iron fist

:kick: