RSS Feeds Feeds: Articles | Issues
Articles About TAP Subscribe Donate
TAPPED  |  Beat the Press

Remember Me
Forgot your password?

The symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.


 



The group blog of The American Prospect

OBAMA ON STATE SECRETS: TRUST ME.

Yesterday Obama reiterated his commitment to a narrower use of the state secrets privilege--a commitment he's already broken in three separate instances. He said he believed the state secrets doctrine should be "modified" and, without acknowledging his own abuse of the privilege, suggested that the administration had only invoked it because they were overwhelmed by having to hit the ground running on the cases in question. He ended by saying:

But searching for ways to redact, to carve out certain cases, to see what can be done so that a judge in chambers can review information without it being in open court, you know, there should be some additional tools so that it's not such a blunt instrument.

And we're interested in pursuing that. I know that Eric Holder and Greg Craig, my White House counsel, and others are working on that as we speak.

The problem with this answer is that the privilege isn't meant to be a blunt instrument -- the Obama administration, like it's predecessor, has chosen to use it as a blunt instrument. It was originally meant to block specific pieces of evidence, not quash entire lawsuits. The recent appeals court decision narrowed the administration's ability to use the privilege to do only the former where there isn't a prior secret agreement between the plaintiff and the government.  I suspect the reason the administration hasn't supported Senator Leahy's bill to regulate the privilege is that it goes too far in giving power to judges, but at this point the administration is going to have to do more to reconcile its rhetoric with its actual performance on the matter. There's no reason to trust them until they do.

-- A. Serwer



COMMENTS

Well, regardless of how one feels about abuse of the state secrets privilege, Congress does not have the power to regulate Presidential powers anymore than the President can regulate Congressional powers. Only the courts can decide if a branch has gone too far in the absence of self-regulation.

But of course, as we know from this very blog, self-regulation doesn't work, so we'll probably need more assertive judges.

But Congress, which already has near unlmiited powers, shouldn't be further removing checks on itself by granting itself the power to regulate the executive branch's inherent Constitutional powers. That would be even more dangerous to our republic than abuse of the state secrets privilege.

Post a comment


Search TAPPED for:

Archives

About TAPPED

TAPPED, the Prospect's award-winning group blog, is a link-intensive collection of musings, ramblings, opinions and other assorted writing on the political developments of the day. See a list of our contributors.

| RSS | Twitter


Renew your print subscription or e-subscription.
Get an e-subscription for $14.95.
Give the gift of political insight. Send The American Prospect to a friend.
Change your email address or street address.
YES! I want to receive The American Prospect
— the essential source for progressive ideas.
Explore The American Prospect's award-winning investigative journalism and provocative essays in a free trial issue. Continue receiving The American Prospect at only $19.95 for a one-year subscription - a savings of 60% off the newsstand price!
First Name
Last Name
Address 1
Address 2
City
State
ZIP     
Email

Should you decide not to continue receiving the magazine after the initial free issue, simply write "cancel" on the invoice and you will not be billed.

© 2010 by The American Prospect, Inc.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Permissions and Reprints