Christian Sciene Monitor has great op piece up on State Secrets & Wiretaps

[kpete]

Opinion
Raise the bar for state secrets privilege By Louis Fisher
Wed Sep 13, 4:00 AM ET



WASHINGTON - Suppose the US government is right now conducting a warrantless surveillance program that not only listens to international calls but to domestic calls, too - in clear violation of the law. Pretend that the press finds out but the administration refuses to acknowledge its existence. In that case, plaintiffs who went to court to argue its illegality wouldn't get very far.

Why not? The government would simply assert the state secrets privilege, which claims that litigation would disclose information damaging to national security. The courts - as they almost always do - would defer to that argument and dismiss the case. The government program would continue, legally unchecked.

That kind of result underscores why courts must not automatically buckle to the state secrets privilege. When the government asserts this privilege, it is merely that: an assertion.

Judge Anna Diggs Taylor rightfully recognized this in her ruling last month that the National Security Agency's (NSA) Terrorist Surveillance Program (TSP) - which monitors the international phone calls and Internet communications between American residents and suspected terrorists abroad - was unconstitutional. But the government also learned a valuable lesson: If it wants to win court cases of this kind, it will simply neither confirm nor deny the existence of surveillance programs.

more at:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/yfisher

[JDPriestly]

1. Surely unconstitutional activities cannot be shielded as state secrets.

The state secret argument should be subordinate to constitutional issues. Constitutional issues should be decided first. They are more fundamental, more important. An unconstitutional state secret? How can that be?