David Kris, the former associate deputy attorney general who now serves as chief ethics and compliance officer at Time Warner, e-mailed Justice Department official Courtney Elwood on 20 December 2005 his own analysis of the controversy, writing that "claims that FISA [the wiretapping statute] simply requires too much paperwork or the bothersome marshaling of arguments seem relatively weak justifications for resorting to Article II power in violation of the statute."
The Washington Post reports on the e-mails here.
Shortly after the program was exposed by The New York Times last December, the ACLU filed a lawsuit challenging the program on behalf of a group of prominent journalists, nonprofit groups, terrorism experts and community advocates. The ACLU, which is also a client in the lawsuit, charged that the spying violates all Americans' rights to free speech and privacy under the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution.
In legal papers filed today before Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit, the ACLU pointed further to the "concrete harm" of the illegal spying program to its clients, saying it disrupts their ability to "talk with sources, locate witnesses, conduct scholarship and engage in advocacy."
"To avoid the giant ear of the NSA, journalists and lawyers now have to make expensive trips overseas to speak with their sources and clients," said ACLU Associate Legal Director and lead counsel Ann Beeson. "We are asking the court to halt the illegal spying program now to prevent even more harm to the free speech and privacy rights of Americans."
- The Center For Consitutional Rights has filed a motion for summary judgment in its lawsuit against the NSA surveillance program. Background on their lawsuit is here. From their press release (received by e-mail):
Today attorneys with the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) will file a significant motion for summary judgment in the challenge to the legality of the NSA Domestic Spying Program (CCR v. Bush), asserting that the Bush Administration has already admitted enough incriminating facts to prove the NSA Program is illegal.
CCR is requesting an injunction to bar the government from continuing its illegal spying on Americans and to disclose whether the government eavesdropped on confidential attorney client communications. The motion is particularly significant because it is unusual for defendants to have admitted enough illegal behavior at an early stage in a case to justify summary judgment.
....Today's brief also provides the most detailed rebuttal to date of the Department of Justice's January 19 memo defending domestic wiretapping. The brief provides a comprehensive "statement of undisputed facts" about the spy program, the plaintiff's injuries from compromised confidential client communications, and a detailed "arguments" section that debunks the Administration's defenses point by point. The entire filing will be available here.
"We can file this aggressive motion because we have proof that the spying program is illegal. The bottom line is the defendants have incriminated themselves - President Bush admitted that he authorized and oversaw an illegal and unconstitutional program. As we told the court, the only facts necessary to resolve the dispute have been admitted by the defendants."
[Graphic created exclusively for TalkLeft by CL.]
