Wiretap Hearings on C-SPAN2 tonight!
Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 02:07:39 PM PDT
My daily alert email from C-SPAN of upcoming programs shows that yesterday's warrantless wiretap hearings will be televised on C-SPAN2 Thursday night (8/16) at 8:00 p.m. ET. These cases, if allowed to proceed, could blow open the whole warrantless wiretapping program.
Yesterday I attended these hearings in US Court of Appeals in San Francisco. One case is Hepting vs AT&T and the other is Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation vs George W. Bush. The U.S. government was asking the appeals court panel to dismiss both cases on the basis that state secrecy trumps everything.
Watch or set your TiVo. These were fascinating to see in person. Failing that you can just take a look at my live-blog of the hearings.
Updated (w/ Audio): Wiretap Appeals Judge: "I feel like I'm in Alice in Wonderland"
Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 05:45:13 PM PDT
Over at Wired, bloggers Ryan Singel and David Kravets just finished liveblogging the U.S. 9th Circuit Appeals court hearing on the companion cases Hepting v. AT&T and Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Bush.
Below are some thoughts on their report of the hearing.
LIVE-BLOG: Warrantless wiretap cases, direct from SF Federal Court of Appeals
Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 05:37:36 PM PDT
This afternoon I attended the hearing in US Court of Appeals in San Francisco for two cases that could blow open the government’s defense in denying the whole warrantless wiretapping program involving domestic communications. There are two cases that were heard today. In both the government was asking the appeals court panel of three judges to dismiss the cases. One case is Hepting vs AT&T and the other is Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation vs George W. Bush.
The whole affair had an "Alice in Wonderland" feel about it, with a government lawyer saying things like, "When the plaintiffs say they know, what they mean is that they think they know but they don’t know," and that he didn’t know how the government found out about the inadvertent disclosure of a classified document.
In both of the appeals, the government lawyers argued mightily that that if a program or document is classified, then there is no possible way that a court could allow a case involving it to go forward. Each of the three judges had some spunk in them and aggressively questioned the defense and the plaintiffs in each case.
Follow me over the fold, see some links, and I’ll fill you in.
