GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post

FillmoreSlim · 05-27-2003, 12:23 PM

(i understand the importance of these hearings especially in the wake of 911 BUT the precedent has been set for the establishment of SECRET hearings...)

High Court Won't Review Secret Deportation Hearings
Tue May 27, 2003 10:20 AM ET
By James Vicini
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court rejected on Tuesday a challenge to the federal government's policy of holding secret immigration hearings of people detained after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The justices declined to review a U.S. appeals court ruling that news media and public access to the deportation proceedings could endanger national security.

Without any comment, the high court refused to hear an appeal by New Jersey newspapers arguing the government may not keep the proceedings secret without a specific, case-by-case showing that closing the hearing would be necessary.

The secret hearings, which have been widely criticized by civil liberties groups, were among the tactics the Bush administration adopted after the hijacked plane attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

A directive 10 days after the attacks ordered immigration judges to close hearings for detainees whose cases the U.S. Justice Department deemed were of "special interest" to the government's terrorism investigation.

Acting on the orders of Attorney General John Ashhahahahaha, Chief Immigration Judge Michael Creppy excluded the media and the detainee's family and friends from the hearings.

The Justice Department argued that opening up the hearings could jeopardize national security by disclosing information that could help Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network learn about the investigation.

The constitutional challenge was brought by two news organizations, North Jersey Media Group and the New Jersey Law Journal. The American Civil Liberties Union represented them.

"We believe that secret hearings are inconsistent with our constitutional system and that there must be scrutiny of the proceedings by the press and public," said Lee Gelernt of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project and the main attorney in the appeal.

A federal judge in New Jersey ruled the government's policy violated the First Amendment right of the public and the media to attend the hearings.

But a Philadelphia-based appeals court, by a 2-1 vote, upheld the policy on the grounds the press and public possessed no First Amendment right of access to the hearings.

In the appeal, ACLU lawyers said the media has an important responsibility to provide the public with information on the government's response to the Sept. 11 attacks.

"If deportation hearings are to be conducted in secret, the First Amendment does not permit that decision to be made on the basis of categorical judgments rather than careful case-by-case determinations," they said.

The Justice Department urged the high court to reject the appeal. It said the appeals court correctly held there was no First Amendment right of public access, and said high court review of the constitutional question would be unwarranted.

During the government's investigation, approximately 766 detainees were designated as 'special interest' cases, 611 of whom had one or more hearings closed, department lawyers said.

05-27-2003, 12:23 PM
FillmoreSlim Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: streetz Posts: 1,236	Supreme Court Authorizes Secret Court (i understand the importance of these hearings especially in the wake of 911 BUT the precedent has been set for the establishment of SECRET hearings...) High Court Won't Review Secret Deportation Hearings Tue May 27, 2003 10:20 AM ET By James Vicini WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court rejected on Tuesday a challenge to the federal government's policy of holding secret immigration hearings of people detained after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The justices declined to review a U.S. appeals court ruling that news media and public access to the deportation proceedings could endanger national security. Without any comment, the high court refused to hear an appeal by New Jersey newspapers arguing the government may not keep the proceedings secret without a specific, case-by-case showing that closing the hearing would be necessary. The secret hearings, which have been widely criticized by civil liberties groups, were among the tactics the Bush administration adopted after the hijacked plane attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. A directive 10 days after the attacks ordered immigration judges to close hearings for detainees whose cases the U.S. Justice Department deemed were of "special interest" to the government's terrorism investigation. Acting on the orders of Attorney General John Ashhahahahaha, Chief Immigration Judge Michael Creppy excluded the media and the detainee's family and friends from the hearings. The Justice Department argued that opening up the hearings could jeopardize national security by disclosing information that could help Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network learn about the investigation. The constitutional challenge was brought by two news organizations, North Jersey Media Group and the New Jersey Law Journal. The American Civil Liberties Union represented them. "We believe that secret hearings are inconsistent with our constitutional system and that there must be scrutiny of the proceedings by the press and public," said Lee Gelernt of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project and the main attorney in the appeal. A federal judge in New Jersey ruled the government's policy violated the First Amendment right of the public and the media to attend the hearings. But a Philadelphia-based appeals court, by a 2-1 vote, upheld the policy on the grounds the press and public possessed no First Amendment right of access to the hearings. In the appeal, ACLU lawyers said the media has an important responsibility to provide the public with information on the government's response to the Sept. 11 attacks. "If deportation hearings are to be conducted in secret, the First Amendment does not permit that decision to be made on the basis of categorical judgments rather than careful case-by-case determinations," they said. The Justice Department urged the high court to reject the appeal. It said the appeals court correctly held there was no First Amendment right of public access, and said high court review of the constitutional question would be unwarranted. During the government's investigation, approximately 766 detainees were designated as 'special interest' cases, 611 of whom had one or more hearings closed, department lawyers said. __________________ New and Improved Chameleon Submitter 2.0 - Submit to TGP and MGP sites - GET YOURS TODAY!