New York Times Sues Federal Government For Refusing To Reveal Secret Interpretation Of The PATRIOT Act

– NYTimes Sues The Federal Government For Refusing To Reveal Its Secret Interpretation Of The PATRIOT Act (Techdirt, Oct. 10. 2011):

from the secret-laws-and-secret-interpretations dept

We’ve been covering for a while now how Senators Ron Wyden and Mark Udall have been very concerned over the secret interpretation the feds have of one piece of the PATRIOT Act. They’ve been trying to pressure the government into publicly explaining how they interpret the law, because they believe that it directly contrasts how most of the public (and many elected officials) believe the feds are interpreting the law. While the two Senators continue to put pressure on the feds and to hint at the feds’ interpretation, just the fact that the government won’t even explain its own interpretation of the law seems ridiculous.

Given all of this, reporter Charlie Savage of the NY Times filed a Freedom of Information Act request to find out the federal government’s interpretation of its own law… and had it refused. According to the federal government, its own interpretation of the law is classified. What sort of democracy are we living in when the government can refuse to even say how it’s interpreting its own law? That’s not democracy at all.

Julian Sanchez points us to the news that Savage and the NY Times have now sued the federal government for not revealing its interpretation of the PATRIOT Act, pointing out that if parts of the interpretation contain classified material, the Justice Department should black that out and reveal the rest, but simply refusing to reveal the interpretation entirely is a violation of the Freedom of Information Act. You can bet that the feds will do everything they can to get out of this lawsuit, just as they did with the various lawsuits concerning warrantless wiretapping. Here’s hoping the court systems don’t let them. No matter what you think of this administration (or the last one) and how it’s handling the threat of terrorism, I’m curious how anyone can make the argument that the US government should not reveal how it interprets the very laws under which it’s required to operate.

Secret-law-FOIA-complaint

More info:

– The Secret Patriot Act Is Staying Secret

– Microsoft Admits Patriot Act Can Access EU-Based Cloud Data

– Machine Signs President’s Signature To Patriot Act (CNN, May 27, 2011)

– President Obama Signs 4-Year Patriot Act Extension in France

– Senator Ron Wyden Says There’s a Secret Patriot Act: ‘I’m talking about instances where the government is relying on secret interpretations of what the law says without telling the public what those interpretations are, and the reliance on secret interpretations of the law is growing.’

– Tea Party Caucus Demonstrates Its Reverence for Freedom and the Constitution by Overwhelmingly Supporting PATRIOT Act

– US DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HAS TOLD BANKS – IN WRITING – IT MAY INSPECT SAFE DEPOSIT BOXES WITHOUT WARRANT AND SIEZE ANY GOLD, SILVER, GUNS OR OTHER VALUABLES IT FINDS INSIDE THOSE BOXES!

– Ex-CIA Official: Patriot Act Is A NAZI Law