Bill to limit executive privlige introduced

[Quantum Windbag]

So much for the claim that only right wingers think Obama is wrong to use executive privilege to cover up Fast and Furious.

Obama and his successors in the White House would be banned from using false claims of national security to conceal “embarrassing or unlawful conduct” by the government, under new legislation proposed by lawmakers on both sides of the House. The proposed State Secrets Protection Act, H.R. 5956, introduced by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-New York), would be the first law to rein in the president’s “state secrets privilege,” a nearly limitless power to kill litigation by claiming a lawsuit would expose national security information to the benefit of America’s enemies. First recognized by the US Supreme Court in a McCarthy-era lawsuit in 1953, the privilege (.pdf) has been increasingly and successfully invoked in the post-9/11 era to shield the government and its agents from court scrutiny in cases involving rendition, torture, warrantless wiretapping, and the lethal targeting of U.S. citizens.
“The ongoing argument that the state secrets privilege requires the outright dismissal of a case is a disconcerting trend in the protection of civil liberties for our nation,” Nadler said of the bill, unveiled last week. ”This important bill recognizes that protecting sensitive information is an important responsibility for any administration and requires that courts protect legitimate state secrets while preventing the premature and sweeping dismissal of entire cases.”
Also signing on to the legislation is Tom Petri (R-Wisconsin), John Conyers Jr. (D-Michigan), and Zoe Lofgren (D-California).

Much-Abused 'State Secrets Privilege' Under Fire in Congress | Threat Level | Wired.com

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So much for the claim that only right wingers think Obama is wrong to use executive privilege to cover up Fast and Furious.

Obama and his successors in the White House would be banned from using false claims of national security to conceal “embarrassing or unlawful conduct” by the government, under new legislation proposed by lawmakers on both sides of the House. The proposed State Secrets Protection Act, H.R. 5956, introduced by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-New York), would be the first law to rein in the president’s “state secrets privilege,” a nearly limitless power to kill litigation by claiming a lawsuit would expose national security information to the benefit of America’s enemies. First recognized by the US Supreme Court in a McCarthy-era lawsuit in 1953, the privilege (.pdf) has been increasingly and successfully invoked in the post-9/11 era to shield the government and its agents from court scrutiny in cases involving rendition, torture, warrantless wiretapping, and the lethal targeting of U.S. citizens.
“The ongoing argument that the state secrets privilege requires the outright dismissal of a case is a disconcerting trend in the protection of civil liberties for our nation,” Nadler said of the bill, unveiled last week. ”This important bill recognizes that protecting sensitive information is an important responsibility for any administration and requires that courts protect legitimate state secrets while preventing the premature and sweeping dismissal of entire cases.”
Also signing on to the legislation is Tom Petri (R-Wisconsin), John Conyers Jr. (D-Michigan), and Zoe Lofgren (D-California).

Much-Abused 'State Secrets Privilege' Under Fire in Congress | Threat Level | Wired.com

I doubt Congress has the Authority if the Courts have ruled it is a check and Balance issue. Would require an Amendment.

 

[Truthmatters]

so a president would have to turn over anything that was requested?

even national secrets?

 

[Charles_Main]

so a president would have to turn over anything that was requested?

even national secrets?

Doubtful. Are you going to try and tell me their are National Security Secrets in the Documents Obama just Used EP for?

Also Doubtful

 

[Truthmatters]

how do you know there is not?

BTW there is gran jury testimony that would be illegal for them to release to congress

 

[Truthmatters]

The second a R was elected the right would repeal this one

 

[g5000]

This is pure political posturing. There is no way there are enough votes to overcome a Presidential veto.

 

[Conservative]

so a president would have to turn over anything that was requested?

even national secrets?

no, moron... he'd have to PROVE handing over the requested information would be a security issue... not just 'say' it would be.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

so a president would have to turn over anything that was requested?

even national secrets?

I guess you didn't read the link.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is pure political posturing. There is no way there are enough votes to overcome a Presidential veto.

Probably true, but the fact is that there are 4 Democrats cosponsoring the bill, so it is obviously stronger on the left than the right.

 

[Ravi]

so a president would have to turn over anything that was requested?

even national secrets?

no, moron... he'd have to PROVE handing over the requested information would be a security issue... not just 'say' it would be.

Who would get to decide?

This will never happen, no president should be hobbled in this manner.

 

[Truthmatters]

so a president would have to turn over anything that was requested?

even national secrets?

no, moron... he'd have to PROVE handing over the requested information would be a security issue... not just 'say' it would be.

PROVE it to whom?

that means someone gets to see the classified docs.

Let not forget what you team did to Plame

 

[Avatar4321]

And why on earth would Congress think they could limit Executive privilege if it's used correctly?

Any bill would be deemed unconstitutional, not that the President would sign it to begin with. So unless 2/3s of the House and Senate approved it wouldnt be an issue anyway.

 

[francoHFW]

No rational bill would bear on this Fast and Furious witch hunt, and this one doesn't.

 

[CaféAuLait]

how do you know there is not?

BTW there is gran jury testimony that would be illegal for them to release to congress

If there were, they would have claimed such a year ago. A little to convenient to claim it the night before Holder is up for a contempt vote.

 

[Inthemiddle]

The link has nothing to do with Executive Privilege

 

[Vidi]

so a president would have to turn over anything that was requested?

even national secrets?

Doubtful. Are you going to try and tell me their are National Security Secrets in the Documents Obama just Used EP for?

Also Doubtful

The identities of undercover agents should be protected. After the Valerie Plaine outing, Im just not going to trust people with political agendas to do the right thing. Fast and Furious was a huge giant totally avoidable mistake which should have consequences, but Im with Obama on keep names out of the hands of the likes of Issa.

 

[Inthemiddle]

so a president would have to turn over anything that was requested?

even national secrets?

Doubtful. Are you going to try and tell me their are National Security Secrets in the Documents Obama just Used EP for?

Also Doubtful

The identities of undercover agents should be protected. After the Valerie Plaine outing, Im just not going to trust people with political agendas to do the right thing. Fast and Furious was a huge giant totally avoidable mistake which should have consequences, but Im with Obama on keep names out of the hands of the likes of Issa.

Executive Privilege has nothing to do with the State's Secret Privilege.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The link has nothing to do with Executive Privilege

Damn, somebody actually reads.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Doubtful. Are you going to try and tell me their are National Security Secrets in the Documents Obama just Used EP for?

Also Doubtful

The identities of undercover agents should be protected. After the Valerie Plaine outing, Im just not going to trust people with political agendas to do the right thing. Fast and Furious was a huge giant totally avoidable mistake which should have consequences, but Im with Obama on keep names out of the hands of the likes of Issa.

Executive Privilege has nothing to do with the State's Secret Privilege.

There is no state secrets privilege.