Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Rights and Liberties

Will Bush's Secret Legal Memos Be Released?

By Chisun Lee, ProPublica. Posted January 30, 2009.


An interactive guide to the Bush administration's classified legal opinions in the 'War on Terror' reveals how much we still don't know.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

See ProPublica's interactive chart of the Bush administration's still secret memos.

Last week, President Barack Obama formally repudiated certain counterterrorism tactics, including coercive interrogation, that his predecessor's administration had gone out defending.

Said Dick Cheney in one parting television interview touching on aggressive interrogation: "I can't claim perfection," but "I can tell you that we had all the legal authorization we needed to do it, including the sign-off of the Justice Department."

Then-President Bush put it more simply. He told CNN's Larry King, "I got legal opinions that said whatever we're going to do is legal."

They were talking about legal analyses generated by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, a small but powerful corps of lawyers who give "authoritative legal advice" to the executive branch. OLC opinions, or "memos," effectively tell executive agencies, including the military, what they may or may not do as a matter of law. Questionable conduct backed by a favorable OLC memo will almost always pass muster. In other words, OLC memos serve as law in the executive branch.

But Bush and Cheney neglected to mention that many OLC memos assessing their strategies for interrogation, detention, surveillance and prosecution remain secret. With an ardent advocate of government openness -- and critic of Bush policies -- slated to take over the OLC, however, people may soon know more.

Some of the memos are by now well-known, for example the August 2002 memo that narrowed the definition of torture. But many counterterrorism-related OLC memos, including all those addressing the administration's domestic warrantless wiretapping program, still haven't been released.

ProPublica has compiled the first interactive list of these crucial records -- missing and known.

These memos laid the legal foundation to many of Bush's most criticized counterterrorism efforts -- the claims of unilateral executive authority to surveil, detain, and try terrorism suspects, unfettered by Congress or international law. Their disclosure could reveal what move was considered when, why and at whose behest.

Dawn Johnsen, a liberal constitutional law professor, has been nominated by Obama to take over the OLC. She has publicly ripped the Bush OLC for its secrecy, accusing it of "a terrible abuse of power" by its "practice of making and relying on secret law." (Johnsen's confirmation is not yet scheduled.)

Her comments carried credibility, as she'd served for five years in Bill Clinton's OLC including as its chief. She decried that the public learned of "extreme" interrogation and secret overseas prisons "only because of government leaks" and "years late." That the Bush administration "continues to withhold other memos," she wrote, demands "outrage."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: war on terror, bush administration, barack obama, foia, aclu, department of justice, john yoo, jay bybee, eric holder, office of legal counsel, stephen bradbury, dawn johnsen, stephen gillers, jameel jaffer, torture memos, marty lederman

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Destroyed Evidence
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jan 30, 2009 1:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You can be absolutely certain that as the final hours of that disgusting administration ticked mercifully away, the shredders in the State and Justice Departments and inside the White House were working overtime. Does the evidence even exist in a physical form any longer?

Our mission now should be to see to it that these people are investigated, prosecuted and sent away to federal prison for the rest of their fucking lives for their crimes against the human race. Nothing less should be settled for.

Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Bloviating Gas Bag

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Destroyed Evidence Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Destroyed Evidence Posted by: ellie
» Pass the popcorn please! Posted by: 2thepoint
I heard tonight...
Posted by: Quannah on Jan 30, 2009 1:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that 4 days before Bush left Washington forever, he signed a "permanent blanket immunity" statement for his senior staff, including Rove, Harriet Miers and Josh Bolton.

There are going to be major constitutional showdowns over this. I doubt it is even valid, but they are going to fight this one all the way to... The Supremes.

I gotta bad feeling...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When we get rid of the two party duopoly in Congress and the White House.
Posted by: Jennifer Bedingfield on Jan 30, 2009 7:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Until then, FORGET ABOUT IT !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The more awful aspects of the abuse of power have gotten lost.
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Jan 30, 2009 8:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You, as a president, don't have a meeting with a few Congresscritters and then decide something is Constitutional or "newly" made legal.

There is a process for changing laws. If you have to ask whether it's ok to change a policy...then, in a Republic, your de fact response should be to seek its explicit allowance.

The administration did that (probably) with torture and so-called "torture". They also did that with warrantless wire-tapping.

Now, you can make an argument for expedited wire-tapping, and if you want to, then you should present it to the Congress of the United States. Not simply invite your drinking buddies in Congress to sip some Old Scotch and tell you they trust you. A country of laws, anyone?

I fear that Bush has set up a precedent that other presidents may follow, to wit, the Nike model of governance: "Just Do It".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Uh, no.
Posted by: Crazy H on Jan 30, 2009 10:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In other words, OLC memos serve as law in the executive branch.

Uh, no - the Constitution serves as law in the executive branch. Cherry picking lawyers who will rubber-stamp blatantly illegal actions simply doesn't cut it.

Even for a pResident - no, make that especially for a pResident - IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Enough talk, already
Posted by: willymack on Jan 30, 2009 1:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's just round up the sorry lot of degenerates resopnsible for two fraudulent "elections" a phony "war on terror", two illegal wars, and crimes, too numerous to mention here, and subject them to a Guantanamo style incarceration (five or six years should do), and with "enhanced interrogation" methods, complete with waterboarding,prior to a bush style kangeroo court, then topped off with a life sentence in the raunchiest federal prison in the system. The time for talk is over.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement