Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Justice Department Refusing to Release Law Memo on Secret Telephone Surveillance

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-21-11 12:28 PM
Original message
Justice Department Refusing to Release Law Memo on Secret Telephone Surveillance


NEWS RELEASE

May 20th, 2011

EFF Demands Answers About Secret Surveillance Law Memo
Justice Department Withholding Information on Controversial Legal Theory

Washington, D.C. - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suit against the Department of Justice (DOJ), demanding the release of a secret legal memo used to justify FBI access to Americans' telephone records without any legal process or oversight.

A report released last year by the DOJ's own Inspector General revealed how the FBI, in defending its past violations of the Electronic Privacy Communications Act (ECPA), had come up with a new legal argument to justify secret, unchecked access to private telephone records. According to the report, the DOJ's Office of the Legal Counsel (OLC) had issued a legal opinion agreeing with the FBI's theory. That legal opinion is the target of the FOIA lawsuit filed Thursday.

The Inspector General's report is heavily redacted, concealing which part of the surveillance statutes the FBI and OLC are relying on to reach their dangerous conclusion and to what types of records this new purported exception to the law applies. However, the report does show that the Inspector General had grave concerns about the FBI's interpretation of the law.

"Even officials within the Justice Department itself are concerned that the FBI's secret legal theory jeopardizes privacy and government accountability, especially considering the FBI's demonstrated history of abusing surveillance law," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "Secret law has no place in our democracy. Congress can't even consider closing this dangerous surveillance loophole until we understand the FBI's legal argument, yet the Department of Justice is still hiding it from Congress and the public."

Earlier this year, the DOJ denied a FOIA request from a journalist seeking disclosure of the secret OLC opinion and in doing so revealed -- perhaps inadvertently -- the specific portion of the law on which the FBI's aggressive legal theory relies. Based on its analysis of that particular ECPA provision, 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(f), EFF fears that the FBI and OLC have wrongly concluded that national security investigators are free to obtain records of Americans' international communications without first obtaining a subpoena or any other legal process. With this additional information about the contents of the OLC opinion, EFF filed its own FOIA request, but the DOJ has continued to stall its release.

"Congress is currently debating how to reform surveillance statutes like the PATRIOT Act and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act," said EFF Senior Counsel David Sobel. "If the FBI is claiming that it has the right to secret, unchecked access to Americans' communications records, Congress and the American public need to know that now."

For the full FOIA lawsuit:
https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/secretlawmemo/complaint.pdf

http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2011/05/19
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-21-11 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. It's almost hard to believe that they wouldn't want to publicize things that are secret. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-21-11 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. guess there's still a John Yoo in the DoJ
of some kind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-21-11 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Indeed. Eric Holder is taking a night course at John Yooniversity. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-21-11 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
4. transparency we can believe in. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-21-11 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
5. They're not only afraid of getting sued. They're afraid of exposing
their methodology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-21-11 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
6. "without any legal process or oversight."
Pretty much going that way all the time these days. The only people getting MORE process and oversight would be you and me, that is We, the People. We get our phones tapped, we get searched at the airports or train stations, we get so-called 'sneak-and-peek' searches -- better known as warrantless searches. We get to dig up our birth certificates to get our driver's license renewed, we get to answer the long-form version of our lives to get a passport. We have any one of a dozen different government agencies operating "without any legal process or oversight" that can pry into our private lives without any reason whatsoever and ruin our lives, again, without any reason whatsoever.

That's some Freedom! :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 12th 2024, 05:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC