SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Speaking before a panel of three judges with the U.S. Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit, Justice Department lawyer Daniel Tenny
They argue that when a legal opinion is adopted by an agency as legal justification for its action, the opinion loses its advisory nature and is thus subject to disclosure. Failure to do so amounts to what senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) refer to as "secret law."
"The OLC opinion at issue in this case set forth for the executive branch an authoritative, controlling interpretation of federal surveillance and privacy statutes," argued EFF staff attorney Mark Rumold.
They continue:
Nonetheless, Tenny told the judges Tuesday "there's no evidence" that the FBI relied on the memo after it was issued.
"There's no evidence that the FBI ever did anything to anyone in the public based on the rationale in this OLC opinion," he said.
The opinion, he said, is "classic deliberative process material."
_____________________
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Speaking before a panel of three judges with the U.S. Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit, Justice Department lawyer Daniel Tenny
They argue that when a legal opinion is adopted by an agency as legal justification for its action, the opinion loses its advisory nature and is thus subject to disclosure. Failure to do so amounts to what senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) refer to as "secret law."
"The OLC opinion at issue in this case set forth for the executive branch an authoritative, controlling interpretation of federal surveillance and privacy statutes," argued EFF staff attorney Mark Rumold.
They continue:
Nonetheless, Tenny told the judges Tuesday "there's no evidence" that the FBI relied on the memo after it was issued.
"There's no evidence that the FBI ever did anything to anyone in the public based on the rationale in this OLC opinion," he said.
The opinion, he said, is "classic deliberative process material."
_____________________
Speaking before a panel of three judges with the U.S. Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit, Justice Department lawyer Daniel Tenny
They argue that when a legal opinion is adopted by an agency as legal justification for its action, the opinion loses its advisory nature and is thus subject to disclosure. Failure to do so amounts to what senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) refer to as "secret law."
"The OLC opinion at issue in this case set forth for the executive branch an authoritative, controlling interpretation of federal surveillance and privacy statutes," argued EFF staff attorney Mark Rumold.
They continue:
Nonetheless, Tenny told the judges Tuesday "there's no evidence" that the FBI relied on the memo after it was issued.
"There's no evidence that the FBI ever did anything to anyone in the public based on the rationale in this OLC opinion," he said.
The opinion, he said, is "classic deliberative process material."
_____________________