Bad Decision for Government Accountability

Yesterday, the Supreme Court refused to hear a case brought forth by the ACLU against the Bush administration for its controversial warrantless wiretapping program, a scandal partially exposed by an AT&T whistleblower.

This big blow to government accountability, and the checks-and-balances system as a whole, is made worse by the rational SCOTUS used to make its decision. From the Los Angeles Times:

…Bush's lawyers successfully invoked two legal doctrines making it difficult to challenge the government's anti-terrorism policies.

First, they said, challengers must show that they had their phone calls or e-mails intercepted. Otherwise, they have no "standing" to sue because they have no injury to complain of. Second, the government said, the entire program was secret, and under the "state secrets privilege," plaintiffs cannot obtain information on whether they were targeted for surveillance. When combined, the two doctrines make it almost impossible for most challengers to win a hearing in court.

So, if American citizens want to challenge secret (and illegal) actions, SCOTUS believes we can’t, unless we know enough about who the actions specifically affected. Which remains a government secret, despite obvious illegality. And citizens already have evidence the wrongdoing happened on a grand scale.

Bad decision for government accountability.

-- Dylan Blaylock