We are non-commercial, all volunteer and supported by our readers. Please help sustain the Dew by making a donation.
Clapper v. Amnesty International:
Associate Justice Alito Changes His Mind About Giving the Targets of Secret Surveillance a Day in Court
Surveillance was victorious over Liberty once again in the U.S. Supreme Court on February 26th. In a 5 to 4 vote in Clapper v. Amnesty International, the court overturned a decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals that U.S. citizen attorneys, activists and journalists working on human rights issues have standing to seek a permanent injunction against the monitoring of their electronic communications with foreigners outside the country by U.S. intelligence agencies. The important work they perform requires privacy of communication so that their sources will give them information. Standing is the requirement parties must have a substantive dispute meriting a judicial decision.
The practical effect of the Supreme Court’s reversal of the Second Circuit is that secret policemen may read the e-mail messages exchanged between U.S. citizens and foreign nationals if they can persuade the U.S. Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence to request a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). How difficult is that? Given that the FISC conducts its business in secret, we don’t know much about its decision-making. However, we do know that in 2011 it granted 1,674 of the 1,676 requests for authority to conduct secret electronic surveillance. The other two requests were withdrawn rather than denied. In effect, all that protects U.S. citizens from having intelligence agents read any e-mails they might exchange with foreigners is a court that holds its proceedings in secret and never says ‘no.’
That a court dominated by conservatives would sacrifice freedom to security is unsurprising, but who wrote the majority decision in Clapper and how he delivered the bad news merits scrutiny. The author is one of former President George W. Bush’s appointees: Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. Here is what Alito said during his January 10, 2006 U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Confirmation Hearing when asked whether the victims of government spying should have their day in court:
“Certainly. If someone has been the subject of illegal law enforcement activities, they should have a day in court. And that’s what the courts are for, to protect the rights of individuals against the government or anyone else who violates their rights. And they have to be absolutely independent and treat everybody equally.”
Yet a day in court is exactly what Alito is denying with the Clapper decision. Without standing, bringing an action for a permanent injunction against being spied upon is blocked.
What is Alito’s reasoning? Because U.S. citizens who believe their electronic communications are being monitored have no knowledge of the Government’s targeting practices, what they fear is “necessarily conjectural.” That is not enough to give them standing in court. In footnote 4 he instructs that it is, “not the Government’s burden to disprove standing by revealing details of its surveillance priorities,” and then follows with a bit of terrorist baiting:
“Moreover, this type of hypothetical disclosure proceeding would allow a terrorist (or his attorney) to determine whether he is currently under U.S. surveillance simply by filing a lawsuit challenging the Government’s surveillance program.”
Not only does Alito tell the subjects of secret government surveillance that they cannot have their day in court because the surveillance they complain about is being conducted secretly – that the burden is on them to produce evidence that is in the possession of the secret police – but then tags them as possible terrorists.
To identify other examples of absurdity as nauseating one has to turn to fiction: the exchange between Captain Yossarian and Doc Daneeka about the rule that is also the title of Joseph Heller’s novel Catch 22. Under that regulation, U.S. Army Air Corps bomber crewmen exposed to escalating risks of death because of the professional rivalries among their senior officers could not be medically grounded for insanity unless they so requested. However, all such requests would be automatically denied because they constituted evidence of sanity.
Under the Clapper decision, targets of secret surveillance are denied legal standing to challenge their secret surveillance because they cannot show that they are being surveilled. They cannot show that because their surveillance is being conducted secretly. That is absurdity so patent, so obvious, that the failure to recognize it could be taken as evidence of insanity.
Worthy of Comment
Also on the Dew
Have you noticed the changes that are taking place at funerals these days? There are several ways that the funerals are not what they once were. The first I noticed it was about 15 years ago, when I was at a graveside funeral for a former boss of mine at Riverside Cemetery in Macon. I arrived just as the service began. The funeral home had set perhaps 50 chairs about, and the minister had just started the service. At first, I didn't realize it. But soon I found that there was no casket present. This may have been the first funeral that I Read on →
“Please hold my hand now. I am dying.” As this soul pulled me close to her, she looked up but just smiled. I had just finished reading “Walking Home From Oak Head” by Mary Oliver to her and she seemed to be pleased to hear some of the refrains again, There is something about the snow-laden sky in winter in the late afternoon that brings to the heart elation and the lovely meaninglessness of time. We had shared many secrets over the years we had known one another, the years of being lovers, of becoming friends. She was “spiritual” in some ways by her reckoning and made me promise to Read on →
I read recently that “serendipity” is looking in a haystack for a needle and discovering the farmer’s daughter. It would truly be a lucky boy who would find such a treasure in a haystack when he was just looking for his car keys. That’s the way I felt this morning after awakening from a delightful dream in which I had finally been awarded my PhD in ancient languages. The rub was that I have never sought such a distinction. In addition, no one in the dream had ever heard of any of the languages that I had been studying. It was all lit Read on →
James Holland writes: Glynn County public works is at it again. I thought my eyes were lying to me when I observed the images in my photos. Tide coming in and you can see how high it is and it is still coming. Glynn County simply has to be the most unscrupulous county in the entire state. Why is it that they continue to do this when all the science is out there about what buffers do to protect our marshes and waters? If anyone knows the name of the single individual that gave the order to do this would you please Read on →