Justices Gorsuch and Sotomayor Bristle at SCOTUS Refusal to Take Up Case on Secrecy of U.S. Surveill

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: Law & Crime

Surveillance Court: ‘If These Matters Are Not Worthy of Our Time, What Is?’

Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Neil Gorsuch were unlikely allies Monday as they issued a dissenting statement from the high court’s denial of certiorari in a case demanding transparency over the proceedings conducted by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) — the judicial body that oversees covert operations conducted by the U.S. intelligence agencies.

A 2016 lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Knight First Amendment Foundation, and Yale Law School’s Abrams Institute challenged the FISC’s practice of keeping its opinions completely secret. Eight former government officials, including former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former General Counsel for the Director of National Intelligence Robert Litt, filed amicus briefs urging the Supreme Court to review the case. SCOTUS, however, denied certiorari, effectively ending the petitioners’ current quest for public access to these opinions.

Justice Gorsuch penned a brief but biting dissenting statement which Justice Sotomayor joined. Gorsuch began with a pointed recap of the problem at hand. A congressional committee was convened in 1975 to look into potential wrongdoing by U.S. intelligence agencies. Quoting from the committee’s report, Gorsuch explained that it concluded “that the federal government had, over many decades, ‘intentionally disregarded’ legal limitations on its surveillance activities and ‘infringed the constitutional rights of American citizens.'”

In direct response to those findings, Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), which in turn, created FISC (a court that would oversee electronic surveillance or “FISA Warrants”) as well as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (FISCR) (which would hear any appeals from FISC’s rulings).

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/justices-gorsuch-and-sotomayor-bristle-at-scotus-refusal-to-take-up-case-on-secrecy-of-us-surveillance-court-if-these-matters-are-not-worthy-of-our-time-what-is/ar-AAQbUfp

[bucolic_frolic]

1. Governments are committed to secrecy

It's not always as dark as it sounds. 'Need to know' governs thinking about government secrecy in some countries. But I don't expect to see SCOTUS open up government very much. Ever.

[ShazamIam]

2. The current U.S. Supreme Court majority reflects the U.S. conservative views of severly limiting

individual rights, except for guns.

[Evolve Dammit]

3. Look at how any "leakers/ whistle-blowers" are villified, hunted, prosecuted for putting truth out.

Chelsea Manning, Assange, Snowden, Reality Winner all put the concealed truth out to the world. And the truth is never openly discussed in meaningful public forums looking to modify/change any of the issues, but the opposite.

[LiberalLovinLug]

4. The disconnect with MAGATs will be predictable

They scream about big gobmint spying on them, and citizens not having access to info. That there is some kind of secret government plot against them.

So a conservative court, with two of Trumps appointees, told them to f off.

But they will go out and scream how a (Democratic) government is always trying to hide their nefarious activities.