And what happened afterwards could seal the fate of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia.
In case you’ve been wondering what’s going on with the resident of Maryland kidnapped by thugs and whisked away to an El Salvadoran hell hole the legal tricks deployed by the Mango Mussolini administration have dragged his case out for weeks. The latest tactic of theirs involves an evidentiary procedure known as “states secrets privilege”.
And that’s why that plane crash in 1948 matters. On Oct 6th, 1948 a B-29 crashed and killed 9 of the 13 crew on board. The cause of the crash was reported as an engine fire. The widows of the victims sued and the government claimed they couldn’t turn over evidence about the flight because of “state secrets”. Eventually the case made it to SCOTUS and in 1953 the United States v. Reynolds case established the government had the right to withhold certain information in the interest of national security. This was the height of the 1950’s Red Scare so.. yeah.
Over the next 25 years the privilege was used only a handful of times. Articles that I read say as few as four. The use increased over the years but it became commonplace after 9/11 with the Bush 43 administration using it dozens of times. In 2008 the House and Senate both attempted to rein the abuses of it in but failed.
So tomorrow, May 15th, (now May 16th, couldn’t find why it changed) the government will present the case why and.. oh boy.. I’ll just copy this paragraph from Wikipedia..
Following a claim of "state secrets privilege", the court rarely conducts an in camera examination of the evidence to evaluate whether there is sufficient cause to support the use of this doctrine. This results in court rulings in which even the judge has not verified the veracity of the assertion. The privileged material is completely removed from the litigation, and the court must determine how the unavailability of the privileged information affects the case.
That the judge has even questioned the government’s claim to secrecy is already rare. But in his chambers, away from public view or scrutiny, the government will make the claim Kilmar Garcia can’t be returned because “reasons”. And if the judge rules in their favor we’ll never know why and he’ll never be returned to his family.
Oh, and that plane that crashed more than three quarters of a century ago? In the late 90’s the records of the crash were unsealed and in 2000 when they were examined it was determined there were no state secrets involved. It was simply a matter of the Air Force not wanting to explain the crash and potentially paying more to the survivors.
Update: A comment about there being some valid reasons for secrecy is missing the point but it deserves to be addressed. The failure to find a reason for secrecy in the 2000 review was tied to the original lawsuit’s claims. Yes, there was some “advanced” technology in the aircraft and a legitimate case could be made for secrecy about those aspects. But not for everything involved in the case. The original ruling itself said the case for secrecy claims should be narrow and used sparingly. Only the secrecy in that very case was not; so the whole thing concept was based on a lie with a nod towards the “red scare”. And the interpretation of the privilege has expanded to the point where “secret” means nothing more than the government doesn’t want to answer embarrassing questions. That’s not a sound legal framework.. well, at least in a democracy.. really great for dictatorships though.
