(Apologies for referring to the district judge as “Higgs.” She’s only just becoming famous.)

1. Judge Vaughan Walker, who rejected the states secret doctrine in AT&T, got assigned the consolidated case. Bush wanted the cases sent to DC. His argument was mocked. (”What, you want to let even more judges in on your dirty little secrets? Who are you trying to kid?”) Good for us!

2. Judge Higgs dismissed ACLU’s complaint about data-mining. The injunction only covers wiretaps. Shows balance. It’s enough for now.

3. She ably weaves through the state secrets cases. The feds came clean on all the needed facts (thanks to “friend of al-Qaeda” NYT). Think where we’d be without that story!

4. Since the program exists by the feds’ own admission they can’t question its existence.

5. They also can’t show they’d need to reveal secrets to defend the case. Higgs said the disclosures she read in private were irrelevant. Their public arguments are on point but unavailing. Her conclusion: “disingenuous and without merit.”

6. She found the ACLU had standing to sue. Main issue: were plaintiffs really hurt? Holding: Yes. Reason: The lawyers lost clients, the journalists sources. Precedent: An enviro who can no longer fish a stream because it reeks can sue. Foil: An enviro who had fond hopes of maybe some day going to the Ozarks to see a snail darter can’t sue (too hypothetical). Etc. Good reasoning. Hard to pierce (but leave it to Thomas to find a way).

7. A dictum on standing: By its nature the spy program creates no self-aware plaintiffs. Thus it could never be challenged under harsh standing doctrine. The Constitution was not excerpted from a Kafka novel, so this is untenable. Not her words, but you see the point!

8. I highly recommend Part IV – IX, which go into the Constitution and the history of its development. It’s all we’ve got, folks!

Here are highlights, which I’ll treat as shoutouts:

a. “Yo, Hayden! There’s a Warrant Clause buried in that Fourth Amendment, and that’s because the executive needs a just to stay honest.”

b. “Yo, Roberts! Jackson’s concurrence in the Steel Case — which you praised almost weepingly in those confirmation hearings — is directly on point. We’ll be watching for you to uphold — and keep those tears flowing!”

c. “Yo, Justice Kennedy! You said in Hamdi there’s no liberty without separation of powers. Don’t turn to the dark side on us.”

d. “Yo, Prez! When you use your powers think of yourself as ‘created by the Constitution,’ not by the God who speaks to you. No divine right, no inheritance from Herbert Walker. Think of it this way: If you do less you get more vacation.”

e. “Yo, Yoo. No inherent powers. It’s strict construction time. No legislating from the Oval Office! Read that quaint Constitution:
‘[a]ll legislative Powers herein granted
shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.’” They meant it. Actually they meant YOO.

f. “Yo, Hastert. Congress can’t give Bush the power to spy illegally. There’s still a Constitution. Wanna share a cell with Yoo?”

9. The Authorization for the Use of Military Force did not empower Bush to spy. Anyone surprised?

10. No emergency powers, not even for GWOT. Constitution doesn’t say that. The question’s been asked and answered in the courts. Not that he needs them.

That’s enough.

Will this hold up on appeal? I think the Hamdan five should hold tight assuming none of them dies. Kennedy shouldn’t cut and run judging from what he said in Hawaii about signing statements. The opinion’s well-reasoned. As said, Walker’s got most of the rest of the spying cases (except those before public utility commissions), so there’ll be good fact finding and a good record below. Counsel are adept. This case looks well-briefed.

The dark side should find for Bush judging from Hamdan. Scary thing is that three, maybe four justices drank the neocon Kool-Aid. (Did anyone go to oral argument? Was that Kool-Aid face on any of their water pitchers?)

Let’s see what Roberts does. He was off Hamdan (for an awful decision below), but he made so much of Jackson’s concurrence in the Steel Case.

Let Hastert and the noise machine do what they will. The matter is now in testy legal hands.

Please, Oliver Stone! Let George Clooney do the movie!

Let us remember Gore’s MLK-Day speech, where he said: I mentioned that along with cause for concern, there is reason for hope. As I stand here today, I am filled with optimism that America is on the eve of a golden age in which the vitality of our democracy will be re-established and will flourish more vibrantly than ever. Indeed I can feel it in this hall.

Watch the video (has a pdf transcript as well). Text Transcript.

Thanks.

Hardball had a brief piece, but nothing on the other two wingnuts’ shows.

Did I miss something?

You might even call them, “Catholics.”

And boy would I like to eat some crow on this prediction.

Yes.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a donor-supported non-profit, filed in January and got Walker’s ruling in July. Just this month 17 newer domestic spying lawsuits were moved into Walker’s jurisdiction, and Walker’s ruling was quoted in today’s ruling.

What the EFF has done is core to these cases, yet they haven’t gotten recognition, or thanks, from major bloggers. Back when Walker’s ruling came out, everyone loved what the EFF did, but no one suggested donating to them.

While the EFF gets results as if they’re a large organization, they’re not. The EFF has also been fighting for bloggers’ rights (big win for online journalists earlier this summer) and against disenfranchisement.

If you like what they do, if you like Walker’s ruling and how it helped today’s ruling, please thank the EFF. (And a ‘donate’ button is a great form of thanks. Note- I know people there and am a supporter: that’s why I’m writing about how bloggers forgot the EFF’s work.)