Update in ACLU Torture FOIA Lawsuit (ACLU)

[Up2Late]

(I'm not sure if a longer Press Reliese will be comming out, but this is the update for now at the ACLU Website. Note all the Press Organizations that joined in this one, this is new!)

Update in ACLU Torture FOIA Lawsuit

August 16, 2005

Contact: [e-mail]

Following a two-hour closed hearing in New York on August 15, a federal judge ordered the government to reveal blacked-out portions of its legal papers arguing against the release of images depicting abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib. The government has until August 18 to make the currently redacted statements public, or to appeal the decision.

The court will next hear arguments on August 30 to determine whether the Defense Department must release 87 photographs and four videos depicting abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib. After unsuccessfully invoking the Geneva Conventions to block the release of the images, the government is now citing a legal provision that permits the withholding of records "compiled for law enforcement purposes," that "could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual."

In a friend-of-the-court brief submitted in the case, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and several media outlets and associations, including CBS Broadcasting, NBC Universal, The Hearst Corporation, The New York Times Co. and the American Society of Newspaper Editors, object to "the government's misdirected effort to undermine the {Freedom of Information Act} by asserting, in essence, that its own misconduct has created an indictment too damning for the public to see." Read the brief at http://action.aclu.org/torturefoia/legal/amicus080305.pdf.

<http://www.aclu.org/International/International.cfm?ID=18921&c=36&s_src=RSS>

(more info at the links above and at the link below)

<http://www.aclu.org/Focus.cfm?ContentStyle=1&num=10>

[ixion]

1. so, they tried to invoke the Genva Conventions to NOT show the photos

I think that's a prime example of typical unethical, amoral, illegal behavior from the 'moral values' admin. :grr:

[Up2Late]

2. What I don't understand is, why does the ACLU have to RE-Argue

the same request that they already WON back in July!?!:wtf: :crazy:

[napi21]

5. I think because the Gov't keeps coming up with new arguments

that also have to be denied. I really don't know how long they can continue this tactic. I'm sure I've heard of cases where the judge just got disgusted and said THIS IS IT!!!!

[Tigress DEM]

8. You are right.

It's like some insane home alone episode with the rethugs as the kids.

Kid gets caught red handed by the scrap of the scrawny in a lie with evidence all over their face and is trying to squirm out of their jacket and then you get a hold of them by the shirt and they spquirm out again and you get a hold of them by the back of the bib overalls and they are trying to convince you that aliens really have landed and are in the front yard about to eat the house.

But it's hard to order the government to do something it doesn't want to...


YEAH!! For the PRESS - Hot diggity, the FOURTH ESTATE IS BAAAACK!

[rodeodance]

6. they use the GC when it suits their purposes just like they use the UN

when it suits their purposes.

[napi21]

3. Gee, a judge who's not intimidated by Rummy!

Hope he sticks with his position and doesn't let this admin bully their way out of this one!

Since this is a Fed. judge, what options does the admin have if this judge insists that the redacted info be released and the photos as well? If they manage to drage this out long enough, will they get a chance to take it to the SCOTUS AFTER they get their boy Roberts in there?

[bluestateguy]

4. Hearings, appeals, motions, periods of discovery, pushing paper,

more appeals, delays.

:grr: I FUCKING HATE LAWYERS :grr:

Lawyers are complexifiers who prevent common sense things from getting done!

[RovianNightmare]

16. whoa dude

There are lawyers working on the right side of this (and every) case as well. We have laws. We need lawyers.

[Sgent]

7. Maybe I'm missing something

But does the judge even have to allow this?

In general, you must put all your responses to a lawsuit in your original request, To come up with a new excuse after this thing has been litigated to the surpreme ct. and back seems a little like delay tatics. The judge should IMHO rule their new argument as too late, and order the photos released in 10 days, w/o a stay.

If the appeals ct. wants a stay, they can issue it.

[napi21]

9. I believe they are pushing the envelope with this judge.

I doubt he's going to let them get away with this tactic much longer, if at all. Notice his next order was scheduled in 3 days, and the last hearing is to be in 2 weeks. I think the next ruling is going to be, "I don't want to hear any more BS, you're orders are to release the damn pics, now DO IT!

[lonestarnot]

12. Judge being very careful to not be overturned....once the cat is out of

the bag it cannot be put back in...It's got some loooooooong ass claws!

[Up2Late]

13. On "The Daily Show," they discribed it as the government taking it...

...to the Court of (insert New York Mafia tough guy voice here)

"Wha'd YOU Gonna' do abou'd it?!?"

[CoffeeCat]

10. Two points about BushCo's tactics...

1.) These photos must be so unimaginably horrendous for them to try to hide their reasons for suppressing the release of the images. They have to "black out" their oral arguments for failing to release the photos--which indicates that these photos must be beyond the pale.

2.) Who the F*ck do these thugs think they are? They expect to keep secret their reasons for suppressing photos that they are unlawfully suppressing???? Just how much does this government "by the people and for the people" think they can hide from "We the people"?

[lonestarnot]

11. Scariest damn bunch ever not elected!

[Up2Late]

14. kick n/t

:kick:

[Up2Late]

15. Update to:Update in ACLU Torture FOIA Lawsuit (ACLU)

(The Update is in Bold. Please Note: "The government has told the court it will release the documents in their entirety sometime next week, as in, the Documents it filed with the Court, we still have to wait until August 30th for the court to hear arguments on these New, totally bogus arguments, about why they shouldn't have to release the 87 Photos and the Videos. :banghead: :mad:

Update to:

Update in ACLU Torture FOIA Lawsuit

August 19, 2005

(NOTE: This is the "Printer Friendly Version")
<http://www.aclu.org/news/NewsPrint.cfm?ID=18921&c=36>

Following a two-hour closed hearing in New York on August 15, a federal judge ordered the government to reveal blacked-out portions of its legal papers arguing against the release of images depicting abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib.

Contact: [e-mail]

Following a two-hour closed hearing in New York on August 15, a federal judge ordered the government to reveal blacked-out portions of its legal papers arguing against the release of images depicting abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib. The government has told the court it will not appeal the decision and will release the documents in their entirety sometime next week.

The court will next hear arguments on August 30 to determine whether the Defense Department must release 87 photographs and four videos depicting abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib. After unsuccessfully invoking the Geneva Conventions to block the release of the images, the government is now citing a legal provision that permits the withholding of records "compiled for law enforcement purposes," that "could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual."

In a friend-of-the-court brief submitted in the case, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and several media outlets and associations, including CBS Broadcasting, NBC Universal, The Hearst Corporation, The New York Times Co. and the American Society of Newspaper Editors, object to "the government's misdirected effort to undermine the (Freedom of Information Act) by asserting, in essence, that its own misconduct has created an indictment too damning for the public to see." Read the brief at <http://action.aclu.org/torturefoia/legal/amicus080305.pdf>. :banghead: :mad:

<http://www.aclu.org/International/International.cfm?ID=18921&c=36>
<http://www.aclu.org/news/NewsPrint.cfm?ID=18921&c=36>