Iranian Regime's Latest Move Shows How Desperate It Has Become
House Republicans Want to Know Why Ilhan Omar's Income Jumped by 140 Percent...
UN Report Says One of the Deadliest Threats to US National Security Is...
Here's What Trump Had to Say About That Olympic Athlete Who Bashed His...
Elites Did Their Part to Fight Global Warming by Flying Dozens of Private...
Historic: U.S. Marks Ninth Month With Zero Releases at the Border
'Brass-Knuckled Hypocrisy:' Even the Washington Post Is Slamming Virginia Democrats' Redis...
This Viral Super Bowl Halftime Story About Bad Bunny's Grammy Was Completely False
John Kasich Called Bad Bunny's Show a Celebration of Latino Culture. Did He...
Senator Eric Schmitt Goes Nuclear on Dems Over ICE Funding, Immigration, and the...
Check Out How the Media Portrayed Japan's Conservative Party's Big Election Win
Here Is the Real Reason Bad Bunny Is Anti-American
We Didn't Think Progressives Could Make LA Any Worse, but They Can
Don Lemon Defends Bad Bunny's Halftime Show While Admitting He Had No Idea...
'The President’s Plan Is Working,' Scott Bessent Predicts a Booming Economy in 2026
Tipsheet

ACLU Demand for Gitmo Info Rejected by Court

Guest post from the American Civil Rights Union

The ACLU was back in court this week, asking a federal judge to force the CIA to reveal in public documents and information about the interrogation of certain detainees at Gitmo. For the second time, the judge refused the demand because to release that information in public would "harm national security."
Advertisement


Some of the facts for this article, but none of the legal conclusions, come from Associated Press article on Google news, on 6 April, 2010. The article recites that a U.S. District Judge, Alvin K. Hellerstein, denied for the second time an ACLU demand that the government "release the names and documents concerning the 9/11 detainees who were interrogated harshly."

The same judge had denied the same relief last September. On behalf of the Director of the CIA, government lawyers had presented an affidavit that release of the information would "gravely damage national security." The second hearing and decision was required because ACLU attorneys were not present when part of the national security argument was made the first time.

Reading between the lines, it sounds like [# More #] the government lawyers gave the judge some information they did not want ACLU lawyers to have. This was a wise precaution in light of the fact that ACLU-associated lawyers for some Gitmo detainees have obtained the identities and surreptitiously-taken photographs of some CIA employees, and shared that information with their clients who are imprisoned at Gitmo. If the names and faces of the CIA men get back to Al Qeada, their lives will be in danger.

Advertisement

The second time around, the judge reached the same conclusion, for two practical reasons. As he said, he had an obligation under the law to "defer to the extent appropriate—and that is substantial—to the decision of the director of the CIA." The ACLU lawyer argued that leaks to date justified the court opening the flood gates. He said, "We believe, given all the disclosures that's taken place already, it would not hurt national security."

The judge replied, "I was not appointed to be the director of central intelligence."

The judge's opinion is in line with what the American Civil Rights Union has written before. A war that is fought by lawyers and governed by judges is a war that the United States will lose. And that certainly seems to be the purpose of the ACLU, in bringing cases like this.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement