A Federal judge has refused a DOJ motion claiming that the courts cannot hear any suits against the ongoing NSA spy programs because such suits might damage national security. The judge ruled that the case can go on and she won't consider the defense motion until after at least the first hearing to determine whether a summary judgement will be issued. In other words, the judge is rejecting the administration's argument that the courts should refuse to rule without ever seeing the legal or factual circumstances. Bravo to Judge Anna Diggs Taylor.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Since I seem to mention StopTheACLU so often, I thought I should have a shorter way to refer to them. STACLU seems to fit the bill; a slightly longer version - stacluelessness - seems a fair description of their problem. A perfect demonstration is this post full of that trenchant analysis you've…
There's also lots of interesting debate going on around the legal blogosphere concerning Judge Taylor's recent ruling in the NSA lawsuit. Orin Kerr raises some interesting questions in a post at Volokh. He points out something that concerned me as well when I first read the ruling. I was not…
Anna Diggs Taylor, come on down. You're the next contestant on Name That Activist Judge. Taylor, a Federal judge in Michigan's eastern district, has granted the plaintiffs' request for an injunction against the NSA's warrantless surveillance programs. That, of course, will mean she will immediately…
As expected, the Bush administration is asking the courts to ignore possible violations of the constitution stemming from the NSA programs for tracking domestic and international calls without ever looking into the question.
The U.S. government has asked a pair of federal judges to dismiss legal…
Those darn activist judges! They actually want to know what the facts are before they rule on something!
Why does she hate our troops so much : P