The Obama Administration wants the Supreme Court to dismiss an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) challenge to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act, an act passed in 2008 that ACLU attorneys contend “allows dragnet surveillance of Americans’ international communications with none of the safeguards that the Constitution requires.” It filed a petition to the Court asking for an appeals court ruling that permits the ACLU to challenge the law to be overturned.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a Republican commissioner on the FCIC who did not sign onto the final report, made some statement to the media about how the FCIC already investigated the areas of inquiry concerning the crash of the housing bubble and found no criminal wrongdoing. But the Chair of the FCIC, Phil Angelides points to the FCIC’s report noting there were criminal referrals, and that was a year ago.

Eric Schneiderman, co-chair of the newly titled “RMBS working group” investigating financial fraud, appeared on the Rachel Maddow Show last night (the interview starts around the 5:00 mark), and there were a few interesting moments. First you have his assessment of the the fraud involved here, which he definitively cast as a pre-crisis issue. Schneiderman, from his public statements, is less concerned with the faulty documentation used to foreclose on borrowers; I would imagine he sees this as the cover-up for the initial crime of securitization fraud, and going back even further origination fraud. He sees that as where the banks’ real exposure lies. And so the working group will look at “all of the conduct that blew up the economy,” not the conduct being engaged in to paper over (literally) all that.

The Administration has reserved some of its most punitive uses of their prosecutorial discretion for government leakers and whistleblowers. Government information gets leaked all the time, often by official sources doing so on behalf of the Administration for political reasons. But no Administration has prosecuted as many government officials for leaking as this one. The chilling effect on whistleblowers damages the rule of law.

This is a $25 billion settlement when there is $700 billion in negative equity in the country. This is a settlement that, according to HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan, will help 1 million homeowners, when 10.7 million are underwater and millions of others have been wrongfully foreclosed upon. This is a settlement that could put $17 billion of credits toward principal reduction (the rest of the money would go to legal aid, refis, short sales, token payoffs to foreclosed borrowers, and penalties), when there is more than twice as much sitting unused in an account as part of HAMP.

The 1% protects the 1%. That’s all we’re talking about here. The problem for the Administration is that millions of homeowners have paid the price for this protection racket, and there’s an election coming up. So the effort will be made to create a fig leaf of a “solution” to “fix” the housing market and benefit homeowners.

What hasn’t received enough attention is the extent to which we’ve already been down this road. In 2008, 12 AGs entered into a settlement with Bank of America over Countrywide lending practices. As part of the settlement, BofA agreed to modify as many as 400,000 mortgages, costing $8.4 billion, with a variety of types of mods, including principal reductions and refinancing. In addition, servicer practices were supposed to change and foreclosure operations on the affected homes suspended.

I keep hearing from everyone “in the know” that these foreclosure fraud settlement talks are just about wrapped up. Surely everyone’s just practicing their signatures for the big signing ceremony, right? Except that there hasn’t really been any news on the settlement for a few weeks. And now the number 3 at the Justice Department, Thomas Perrelli, the central figure running the talks from the federal government side, will step down in a couple months.

Because the Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter ID law in 2008, it would not surprise me to see them uphold South Carolina’s version. And that could be a means to invalidate Section 5, giving Southern states with a history of racial discrimination in voting the chance to do so again.

The New York Times sued the Justice Department over their reticence to turn over a memo from the Office of Legal Counsel detailing the argument for how the US government can legally assassinate an American citizen.