The ACLU's and other groups' legal challenge the Bush era FISA law is getting a new life as an Appeals Court has ruled that they do indeed have standing to sue:
[T] plaintiffs have good reason to believe that their communications in particular, will fall within the scope of the broad surveillance that they can assume the government will conduct. The plaintiffs testify that in order to carry out their jobs they must regularly communicate by telephone and e-mail with precisely the sorts of individuals that the government will most likely seek to monitor — i.e., individuals “the U.S. government believes or believed to be associated with terrorist organizations,” “political and human rights activists who oppose governments that are supported economically or militarily by the U.S. government,” and “people located in geographical areas that are a special focus of the U.S. government’s counterterrorism or diplomatic efforts.” The plaintiffs’ assessment that these individuals are likely targets of [FISA Amendments Act] surveillance is reasonable, and the government has not disputed that assertion.I fully expect, to my chagrin, the Obama Administration to continue the fight to preserve the spy law. David Kravets hypothesizes that defense will come in the form of the evocation of "state secrets":
The case will now return to the courtroom of U.S. District Court Judge John G. Koeltl in New York, where, if past is prologue, the Obama administration will play its trump card: an assertion of the powerful State Secrets Privilege that lets the executive branch effectively kill lawsuits by claiming they threaten to expose national security secrets.
“State secrets could definitely come into it,” Myers said.
The courts tend to defer to such claims.
