Is America still free?
The New York Times reports on the secret ruling based upon secret evidence
Because the ruling was classified, the defense lawyers were barred from reading why the judge decided that way. The defense lawyers had asked the judge to dismiss the case, saying that they believed the government’s evidence came from wiretaps obtained without a warrant by the National Security Agency. [...]
It is common in federal court for judges to place documents and legal discussions under seal, meaning that the judge and the lawyers can be informed of the proceedings, but the public cannot. In this case, Judge McAvoy’s order is classified, a higher degree of secrecy. As of late yesterday, Mr. Kindlon, even though he has a federal security clearance to represent Mr. Aref in the trial, had not been able to see the substance of the ruling.
“Frankly, I’m taken aback,” Mr. Kindlon said. The ruling “holds out no promise of anything” for him to see the decision, he said.
Kindon wants all evidence from NSA wiretapping turned over for examination and, probably, suppressed because it was gathered illegally. The government appears to be aware that the warrantless wiretapping was performed contrary to the laws and is doing everything possible to preserve it — even including getting judges to issue secret rulings on the basis of secret evidence which no one is allowed to see.
This isn’t compatible with the constitutional protection of a fair trial, but the current administration has displayed little or no interest in obeying the Constitution. For Bush and his coterie, the presidency is an office that rules, not an office that governs. Power and wielding it are all that matter to them, even when they believe that they are doing good.
Quick Poll: Should courts be allowed to issue secret rulings based on secret evidence?
- Yes, if the government says it's necessary. We should trust the government.
- No, secret rulings and secret evidence prevent the accused from being defended.
- I don't know.
- I don't care.
Read More: