Lawyers for Guantanamo detainees want surveillance records. An appeals court ruled Wednesday that agencies could refuse to confirm or deny the existence of such records for national security.
A federal appeals court in New York ruled on Wednesday that US government agencies may refuse to confirm or deny the existence of records when faced with a Freedom of Information Act request that might disclose sensitive intelligence activities, sources, or methods.
The ruling by a three-judge panel of the Second US Circuit Court of Appeals was in connection with a lawsuit seeking information about whether the US conducted secret surveillance of lawyer communications with detainees at the Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, prison camp.
The FOIA request was submitted in 2006 by 23 lawyers who represent individuals being held as terror suspects at Guantánamo. The request sought records from the National Security Agency (NSA) and Justice Department “obtained or relating to ongoing or completed warrantless electronic surveillance or physical searches regarding, referencing, or concerning…” any of the 23 lawyers.
Bush Authorized Terrorist Surveillance Program
Government officials have acknowledged that the NSA conducted warrantless surveillance under the Terrorist Surveillance Program (TSP) authorized by President Bush. It was conceived as an early warning system to prevent imminent terror attacks, but was conducted for a time without judicial oversight.
NSA officials refused to confirm or deny whether the agency had any records responsive to the FOIA request.
The Guantánamo lawyers sued. They argued that since the TSP was no longer secret, the government should not be excused from acknowledging the presence of responsive documents.
In 2008, a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that the government could refuse to directly acknowledge the FOIA request to maintain secrecy and protect national security. The judge also issued an opinion that the NSA’s response was not designed to conceal illegal intelligence operations.
In upholding the judge’s ruling, the Second Circuit panel joined four other courts of appeal in allowing the government to use the device of neither confirming nor denying records in a FOIA request. The other appeals courts are the DC Circuit in Washington, the First Circuit in Boston, the Seventh Circuit in Chicago, and the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco.
Appeals Court Panel Sides With Government
“Although the public is aware that the TSP exists, the government has found it necessary to keep undisclosed the details of the program’s operations and scope,” Judge Jose Cabranes wrote for the appeals court panel. “The fact that the public is aware of the program’s existence does not mean that the public is entitled to have information regarding the operation of the program, its targets, the information it has yielded, or other highly sensitive national security information that the government has continued to classify.”
Judge Cabranes added: “The NSA asserts that it cannot provide any more information without doing cognizable harm, and we agree. The [government] affidavits sufficiently establish that nondisclosure is appropriate – perhaps essential – for reasons of national security and confidentiality.”
The appeals court also agreed with the district judge that there was no evidence that the government was using an evasive response to the FOIA request to coverup wrongdoing. “We do not find any evidence that even arguably suggests bad faith on the part of the NSA, or that the NSA provided an [intentionally evasive] response to plaintiffs’ requests for the purpose of concealing illegal or unconstitutional actions,” Cabranes wrote.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.