Obama to Set Higher Bar For Keeping State Secrets

[shortylickens]

Am suprised no one posted this yet.

By Carrie Johnson
Washington Post Staff Writer, Wednesday, September 23, 2009

The Obama administration will announce a new policy Wednesday making it much more difficult for the government to claim that it is protecting state secrets when it hides details of sensitive national security strategies such as rendition and warrantless eavesdropping, according to two senior Justice Department officials.

The new policy requires agencies, including the intelligence community and the military, to convince the attorney general and a team of Justice Department lawyers that the release of sensitive information would present significant harm to "national defense or foreign relations." In the past, the claim that state secrets were at risk could be invoked with the approval of one official and by meeting a lower standard of proof that disclosure would be harmful.

That claim was asserted dozens of times during the Bush administration, legal scholars said.

The shift could have a broad effect on many lawsuits, including those filed by alleged victims of torture and electronic surveillance. Authorities have frequently argued that judges should dismiss those cases at the outset to avoid the release of information that could compromise national security.

The heightened standard is designed in part to restore the confidence of Congress, civil liberties advocates and judges, who have criticized both the Bush White House and the Obama administration for excessive secrecy. The new policy will take effect Oct. 1 and has been endorsed by federal intelligence agencies, Justice Department sources said.

More article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...4295.html?hpid=topnews
For the first time in a little while I got a Washing Post outside of Bob Evans this morning. Would have thought this all over Anandtech already.

My Opinion: Overall this is good. Too much bullshit has been allowed over the past 8 years in the name of National Security.

Also, I would like to take this time to say I am not super happy with The Post.
Last time I got a paper the front page, main section article was about how Redskins fans are ticked about the price of tickets.
Buried deep in a subsection on a last page was a tiny little note about how we are losing the war. And it wasnt an opinion or editorial, it was a regular article by a reporter who interviewed generals and other top brass saying exactly that.

Hadnt bought a paper in the three weeks since. Today was a fluke more than anything.

 

[First]

Good, very very good. Obama's administration has been quite disappointing so far with regards to civil liberties, but maybe this is a stepping stone to better days.

 

[bamacre]

Sounds good to me. :thumbsup:

Edit: Due the a better opinion below, I take back my :thumbsup: and add a :thumbsdown:.

 

[sciwizam]

There may be more to the story: Glenn Greenwald. Keep an eye on his blog, he might have a detailed post later.

On a different note, the so-called "new state secrets policy" which the Obama DOJ is set to unveil is such a self-evident farce -- such an obvious replica of all the abuses that characterized the Bush/Cheney use of that privilege which Obama himself has spent the last eight months embracing -- that I couldn't even bring myself to write about it. It would not have altered a single one of the controverisal uses and is a complete non-sequitur to the objections raised to its abuses (including, once upon a time, by Obama himself). Fortunately, both Emptywheel andThe American Prospect's Adam Serwer laid out all of the reasons why this is so.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: sciwizam
There may be more to the story: Glenn Greenwald. Keep an eye on his blog, he might have a detailed post later.

On a different note, the so-called "new state secrets policy" which the Obama DOJ is set to unveil is such a self-evident farce -- such an obvious replica of all the abuses that characterized the Bush/Cheney use of that privilege which Obama himself has spent the last eight months embracing -- that I couldn't even bring myself to write about it. It would not have altered a single one of the controverisal uses and is a complete non-sequitur to the objections raised to its abuses (including, once upon a time, by Obama himself). Fortunately, both Emptywheel andThe American Prospect's Adam Serwer laid out all of the reasons why this is so.

Sadly, I trust Greenwadl's interpretation over the Obama administration's (see my sig).

I do give Obama credit for fixing the FOIA, though.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: sciwizam
There may be more to the story: Glenn Greenwald. Keep an eye on his blog, he might have a detailed post later.

On a different note, the so-called "new state secrets policy" which the Obama DOJ is set to unveil is such a self-evident farce -- such an obvious replica of all the abuses that characterized the Bush/Cheney use of that privilege which Obama himself has spent the last eight months embracing -- that I couldn't even bring myself to write about it. It would not have altered a single one of the controverisal uses and is a complete non-sequitur to the objections raised to its abuses (including, once upon a time, by Obama himself). Fortunately, both Emptywheel andThe American Prospect's Adam Serwer laid out all of the reasons why this is so.

Ahh, the truth comes out. And change goes back to hiding. Pfffft.

 

[BarrySotero]

Yay Obama and Holder once again doing what they can to make the world safe for terrorists. Have they met one yet they didn't seem to put first? What a disgrace.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: BarrySotero
Yay Obama and Holder once again doing what they can to make the world safe for terrorists. Have they met one yet they didn't seem to put first? What a disgrace.

I love how you would give up your freedom for safety and then march on the capitol talking about freedom and holding a flag.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: BarrySotero
Yay Obama and Holder once again doing what they can to make the world safe for terrorists. Have they met one yet they didn't seem to put first? What a disgrace.

What is really funny about this post is that this troll is so clueless about the actual article. He saw the thread title, and came in to thread crap his troll-bait.

But if he could actually read the article, and the GG comment in the thread, he would have realized it basically does everything Bush/cheney did, which is what he would want anyway.

Guess reading skills are not high up a troll's list.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: BarrySotero
Yay Obama and Holder once again doing what they can to make the world safe for terrorists. Have they met one yet they didn't seem to put first? What a disgrace.

What is really funny about this post is that this troll is so clueless about the actual article. He saw the thread title, and came in to thread crap his troll-bait.

But if he could actually read the article, and the GG comment in the thread, he would have realized it basically does everything Bush/cheney did, which is what he would want anyway.

Guess reading skills are not high up a troll's list.

You have to give him credit though. Despite his ignorance, he's a great troll.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Robor
You have to give him credit though. Despite his ignorance, he's a great troll.

I don't give credit to 'great robbers', 'great rapists', 'great trolls', 'great plagiarists', etc.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: sciwizam
There may be more to the story: Glenn Greenwald. Keep an eye on his blog, he might have a detailed post later.

On a different note, the so-called "new state secrets policy" which the Obama DOJ is set to unveil is such a self-evident farce -- such an obvious replica of all the abuses that characterized the Bush/Cheney use of that privilege which Obama himself has spent the last eight months embracing -- that I couldn't even bring myself to write about it. It would not have altered a single one of the controverisal uses and is a complete non-sequitur to the objections raised to its abuses (including, once upon a time, by Obama himself). Fortunately, both Emptywheel andThe American Prospect's Adam Serwer laid out all of the reasons why this is so.

Heh so what he is saying is Obama claims to distance himself from the Bush admin by recreating the same? I havent seen this before

 

[EagleKeeper]

More people may be involved; but it is still subjective in terms of harm.

Unless the Justice Department lawyers are experienced in the area of concern; they will either take the recommendation of the specialists (as currently done) or deny based on orders on high. If they are experienced; they will probably err on the side of caution.

20/20 hindsight is very valuable when looking at the past what if, but lousy at looking into the future.