jkhuggins

And that's a perfectly reasonable position to argue --- one with which I would largely agree. We should be having that discussion.

My objection is solely restricted to the ad hominem attacks against government officials ("how can they sleep at night?"). I think that's out-of-bounds. Not everyone who disagrees with me is morally deficient.

(Just most people.)

GUWonder

Some US government officials should be asked "how can they sleep at night?" given what has been authorized and/or done under claimed authorization.

By the way, most criminal trials include ad hominem "attacks" on the defendant and/or even some witnesses; and those "attacks" stand in the court record and are routinely allowed to be considered in deliberations by juries and/or judges.

Boggie Dog

Seeing as how some government officials refuse to comply with the laws of the land and no one seems interested in holding them to account ad homien attacks are about all that we have left. Take DNI Clapper for example. He lied to Congress and so far has gotten away with it.

Caradoc

"The sleeping methodologies of DHS and TSA personnel are SSI."

GUWonder

Extrajudicially getting put on blacklists is an ad hominem attack too. How people get on the aviation blacklists is SSI+ but even the government willfully decides not to investigate how some people have ended up on the blacklists and just tries to brush aside and bury under brush the administrative denial of the freedom of movement that so-called democratic governments are increasingly using against people not convicted of a crime in an open and fair trial.

studentff

Maybe my education was better than I thought (mix of public and DoDDs elementary and secondary schools, large state university for BS and grad school), but the "we are violating the Constitution 'for the greater good,' argument which I hear so much immediately raises my hackles." The whole point of the Constitution was to avoid that sort of logic, and that was grilled into me at every level of education from liberal, conservative, and even just-plain-kooky teachers.

I do think that most of these people do have good intentions, but they then rationalize obviously unacceptable behavior and get away with it. I can't tell for sure if they don't care about the innocent people who are impacted (and maybe have their lives ruined) by their actions or if they just find them to be acceptable collateral damage defending against this overly-magnified threat (which on most days just isn't there). It's the impact on the innocent people that I would hope causes sleep problems.

One of my best friends from a previous phase in my life works at no such agency and has for 10+ years. He was more libertarian than me in his youth. Good guy, patriotic, military brat like me, has wife and kids now. I wish I could sit and watch him leaf through a stack of articles on the actions of his employer, DHS, etc., and just watch his facial reactions. Deep down he must still know that our dad's didn't spend 20+ years each in the service and our grandfathers didn't slug through the mud and snow in 1944 for the American government that we have today.

JObeth66

'The ends justify the means'. That's what it comes down to, and sadly, too many Americans believe it.

ehasbrouck

The Identity Project: "Trial judge finds for plaintiff Dr. Ibrahim in no-fly case"

http://papersplease.org/wp/2014/01/1...n-no-fly-case/

FredAnderssen

Hallelujah! But the government will never let this ruling stand, as it has many means to make sure it never happens.

bdschobel

Still, it's a step in the right direction.

Bruce

janetdoe

^

Ari

There's not much they can do other than appeal. State can still reject her visa application for almost whatever reason they want. The Court of Appeals is not going to upset Judge Alsup's factual conclusions unless clearly erroneous. He heard the evidence and it appears that he decided that Ibrahim was listed for no reason-- that the government made a mistake:

(emphasis added).

It appears from the docket that the government was fighting tooth and nail to hide this fact and they lost big time. The Court's legal conclusion that TRIP is an insufficient post-deprivation remedy is subject to review, but his factual findings about what TRIP is and what it does and does not do are unlikely to be upset. The specific remedy might get some tinkering, but the finding of fact that the government made a mistake is here to stay.

nachtnebel

^^^^^^^^

RedSnapper

More info on the decision is coming out, slowly. The partially redacted court opinion is here. Apparently the entire order is due to be made public on April 15, 2014.

T-the-B

It appears the government screwed the pooch and then tried to cover it up by crying "Terrorism!!!". Wow! You mean government officials will lie to cover their backsides? Who could have seen that coming? (/sarcasm)

An article from Wired says that Prof. Ibrahim was initially placed on the no-fly list due to clerical error. Then the Justice Department spent years basically lying to the courts in an attempt to avoid embarrassment. Does anyone think TSA would falsely claim "SSI" just to avoid disclosing embarrassing facts, too?