In Thomas Drake Case, Protected Doesn’t Mean Protected

By: emptywheel Wednesday June 1, 2011 6:12 am

Earlier, we learned that (thanks to Antonin Scalia) the word “suspicion” no longer means what it used to mean.

Now we learn that “protected” doesn’t mean what it used to mean.

As Josh Gerstein reports, the judge in the Thomas Drake case has agreed to let the government protect unclassified information using the Classified Information Procedures Act. But as Drake’s lawyers make clear, the process of substitution is making unclassified information look classified.

High Court Grants Ashcroft Immunity; Scalia Invents New Meaning for “Suspicion”

By: emptywheel Tuesday May 31, 2011 11:44 am

SCOTUS has just ruled unanimously that John Ashcroft can’t be sued by Abdullah al-Kidd for using a material witness warrant to incarcerate him. The eight justices (Elena Kagan recused herself) all agree there was no law explicitly prohibiting this kind of abuse of material witness warrants, so Ashcroft has immunity from suit.

Constitutional Rights a Casualty of Endless “War”

By: Jon Walker Wednesday May 18, 2011 5:38 pm

When facing endless “war,” be it a war on drugs or a war on terror, such niceties as constitutional rights always end up a causality of these nebulous conflicts. After all, when eternally battling with a generalized evil that will never cease to exist, the trampling of a few personal freedoms can be framed as an acceptable price. The latest example of this trend can be seen with this horrible new Supreme Court ruling, which basically shreds our Fourth Amendment rights.

Constitutional Rights a Casualty of Endless “War”

By: Jon Walker Tuesday May 17, 2011 9:49 am

The lone dissent was from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg who realized this ruling just gave police carte blanche to routinely ignore the Fourth Amendment in drug cases. Police can use almost any noise they hear to claim they have “good reason” to believe evidence is being destroyed, and if the history of how police have bent and broken the rules to fight the war on drugs is any guide, they will.

SCOTUS: Government Can Use “State Secrets” to Hide Crimes

By: emptywheel Monday May 16, 2011 9:10 am

In effect, SCOTUS’ decision not to take this case leaves in place state secrets precedent that allows the government to commit grave crimes, but hide behind state secrets.

Roberts Court Sticks Another Dagger In the Back Of Consumers

By: bmaz Wednesday April 27, 2011 6:34 pm

Well, yes, of course this was the decision of the Roberts Court; it was as predictable as the sun rising in the east. The conservative block in the Roberts Court – Roberts, Scalia, Alito, Thomas and Kennedy rarely miss an opportunity to buck up big business and screw individuals and consumers when it comes to any issue involving class action law and/or standing. It is simply what they do, and they have no problem doing by politicized 5-4 majority opinion.

The Ghosts of SCOTUS Justices Past Continue to Haunt Holder

By: Peterr Saturday November 13, 2010 9:00 am

Today is the 154th birthday of SCOTUS Justice Louis Brandeis, one of the Court’s most forceful voices for freedom of speech and the right to privacy. Today, as AG Eric Holder deals with cases involving torture, wiretapping, state secrets, GQ paints a picture of an AG filled with angst, as Marcy Wheeler summed it up yesterday. But maybe it’s not angst, but that Holder is being haunted by SCOTUS Justices past, like Brandeis, Holmes, Robert Jackson, and Potter Stewart.

Happy birthday, Justice Brandeis, and keep up the good work.

Supreme Court Leaves “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Intact During Appeal

By: Teddy Partridge Friday November 12, 2010 2:45 pm

Surprising no one, the Supreme Court left intact (without comment) the ban on open service in our military by gays and lesbians while the Appeals Court determines its constitutionality.

Je Récuse! Supreme Court Starts Session, Often with Eight Justices

By: David Dayen Monday October 4, 2010 12:35 pm

It’s the first Monday in October, which means that the Supreme Court reconvenes in Washington. Their docket this term includes a number of First Amendment cases. And while the new members of the Court chosen by President Obama have created a true partisan divide, with the court’s members appointed by Democratic Presidents nominally on the center-left, and those appointed by Republicans on the right, we won’t get to see that in action entirely this year. Because Elena Kagan, the newest Justice, has recused herself from 25 out of the 51 cases so far this term.

With Kagan On SCOTUS, We Are Still Down A Justice

By: bmaz Saturday September 11, 2010 7:50 am

With the long anticipated retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens, it was important for President Obama to appoint and get confirmed a new justice so there would not only be a full compliment of justices on the court, but to insure the ideological balance of the court was maintained. By selecting Elena Kagan, Obama certainly did not pick the most qualified person for the job, nor did he maintain the ideological balance particularly as Kagan undoubtedly moved the court to the right at least to some degree.

Stop LGBT Discrimination
CSM Ads advertisement
FOLLOW FIREDOGLAKE
become a member
Advertisement
FIREDOGLAKE’S #OCCUPY COVERAGE

LATEST FROM AROUND FIREDOGLAKE
Upcoming FDL Book Salons

Saturday, May 26, 2012
2:00 pm Pacific
The Great American Foreclosure Story: The Struggle for Justice and a Place to Call Home Chat with Paul Kiel about his new book.
Hosted by Cynthia Kouril.

Sunday, May 27, 2012
2:00 pm Pacific
MIC at 50: The Military Industrial Complex at 50 Chat with David Swanson about his new book.
Hosted by Eric Stoner.


Close