How the Government Is Passing Secret Laws政府如何通過法律的秘密
By通過 Sean Gonsalves肖恩貢薩爾維斯 | Once upon a time, a team of federal attorneys went before the Supreme Court only to discover that their entire case was based on a revoked executive order and therefore moot. |黃飛鴻的時間，一隊聯邦律師來到之前，最高法院只發現他們的整個案件的基礎上，撤銷行政命令，因此模擬。
True story.真實的故事。 Look it up.看看它。 Panama Refining Company v. Ryan 巴拿馬煉油公司訴瑞安 . 。 The revoked presidential order was understandably missed by the attorneys.已撤銷的總統令是可以理解的錯過了由律師。 The revocation had never been made public — an example of what legal scholars refer to as “secret law.”撤銷從未公開-一個例子，什麼樣的法律學者稱之為“秘密法” 。
Cases like that caused Congress, in the ’30s and ’40s, to pen legislation aimed at bringing order to the dissemination of vital government information, amid the chaotic complexity of state administrative laws and downright shoddy record-keeping.案件一樣，所造成的國會，在1930年代和'40s ，以筆立法旨在使以傳播重要的政府信息，在混沌的複雜性，國家的行政法規和徹頭徹尾的偽劣備存紀錄。 Congress also established statutes to keep a growing body of secret law in check.大會還設立了章程，以保持越來越多的秘密法，在檢查。
That’s how we got the Federal Register Act of 1935, the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946 and the golden key to open government (and investigative reporting) — the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).這就是我們如何獲得聯邦註冊的行為， 1935年的行政程序法和1946年的金鑰匙開放的政府（和調查報告） -資訊自由法（ f oia） 。
Those legislative acts exemplify one of the defining features of American government — the publicizing of laws and regulations.這些立法行為的例證之一界定的特點，美國政府-宣傳法律和法規。 The political philosophy isn’t hard to understand.政治哲學是不難理解。 Secret laws are the antithesis of a free and open society, which explains why the first US Congress mandated that every “law, order, resolution, and vote (shall) be published in at least three of the public newspapers printing within the United States.”秘密法律的對立面，一個自由開放的社會，這亦解釋了為什麼第一次美國國會授權的每一個“法律，秩序，決議，並投票（應該）出版的至少有三個市民報紙的印刷與美國。 “
But, never mind — for the moment — the decline of newspapers, and the harmful implications it has for democratic governance.不過，不要緊-為的時刻-下降的報紙，和有害的影響，它已為民主治理。 Even more alarming is the underreported increase of unpublicized “secret laws,” clandestinely cultivated in recent years.更令人擔憂的是，不足的增加，未經公示的“秘密的法律， ”暗中培養在近幾年。
We’re talking everything from secret interpretations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and opinions from the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) to secret Presidential directives and transportation security orders.我們正在談，一切從秘密的解釋，外國情報監視法和意見，由法律顧問辦公室（法律顧問室）的秘密總統的指示和運輸安全的命令。
And don’t let the word “opinion” throw you off.不要讓字的“意見”丟你趕走。 If, for example, they’re “opinions” issued by the OLC — like the now infamous Yoo torture memos — those kind of “opinions” are binding on the executive branch.舉例來說，如果他們的“意見”發出的，由法律顧問室-像現在臭名昭著的柳酷刑備忘錄-那些種“意見”對雙方都具有約束力，行政部門。
So, while the Washington press heavy-hitters were analyzing flag pins and pastors, a Judiciary subcommittee hearing was held on因此，儘管華盛頓的新聞重的擊球手被分析的國旗旗桿牧師，司法小組委員會的聽證會舉行的 “Secret Law and the Threat to Democratic and Accountable Government” “秘密法，並威脅到民主和負責任的政府” . 。
Among the half-dozen or so witnesses to testify was the director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists,其中半打以上的，或使證人作證是項目主任對政府的保密，在美國科學家聯合會， Steven Aftergood史蒂芬aftergood — one of the nation’s preeminent authorities on secret law. -一個民族最傑出的有關當局秘密法。 What should have been a top-story across the country was rendered invisible by a tsunami of triviality.什麼應該已經頂級的故事，整個國家是提供無形的，由海嘯triviality 。
Here’s some testimony you probably missed:這裡的一些證詞，你可能錯過了：
“There has been a discernible increase in secret law and regulation in recent years” to the point where “legislative intervention” is required to “reverse the growth.” “有一個可察覺的增加在秘密法及規管在近幾年”點“立法干預”必須“逆向增長” 。
Unsurprisingly, secret law really became entwined with the government during the Cold War.不出所料，秘密法真正成為交織在一起，與政府在冷戰期間。 But today, “secrecy not only persists, it is growing.但今天， “保密不僅持續存在，這是越來越多。 Worse, it is implicated in fundamental political controversies over domestic surveillance, torture, and many other issues directly affecting the lives and interests of Americans.”更糟的是，它是有牽連的根本政治爭議，國內監視，酷刑，和許多其他問題，直接影響生命和利益的美國人“ 。
The law that governs espionage activity has been re-interpreted by the FISA Court, the specific nature of which has not been disclosed to the public?依法執政間諜活動已重新解釋，由參賽指南法院，具體的性質，一直沒有向公眾披露？
In August 2007, the American Civil Liberties Union petitioned the court on First Amendment grounds to make public those legal rulings, after redacting classified information.在2007年8月，美國公民自由聯盟請願，法院對第一修正案的理由，使市民的這些法律的裁決後， redacting機密資料。 The court denied the ACLU petition, claiming it didn’t have the expertise to decide what information should be redacted.法庭拒絕了美國民權聯盟的請願書，聲稱它不具備專業知識，來決定哪些信息應節錄。
The denial was issued despite it being evident “that there is a body of common law derived from the decisions of the (FISA court) that potentially implicates the privacy interests of all Americans.拒絕發表的，儘管它被明顯的“有一個機構，共同的法律來自的決定（參賽指南法院）表示，可能牽涉到隱私權的利益，所有的美國人。 Yet knowledge of that law is deliberately withheld from the public.然而，知識，法律是故意不從市民。 In this way, secret law has been normalized to a previously unknown extent and to the detriment, I believe, of American democracy,” Aftergood testified.就這樣，秘密法已歸到一個先前不為人所知的程度和損害，我相信，美國的民主“ ， aftergood作證。
Other areas of concern: “there appears to be a precipitous decline in publication of OLC opinions in recent years … In 1995, there were 30 published opinions, but in 2005 there were 13.其他方面的關注： “似乎是一個倉促的跌幅出版法律顧問室的意見，在最近幾年… …在1995年，有30發表的意見，但在2005年有13宗。 In 1996, there were 48 published opinions, but in 2006 only 1.在1996年，有48人發表意見，但在2006年只有1 。 And in 1997 there were 29 published opinions, but only 9 in 2007.”並於1997年有29發表的意見，但只有9個在2007年“ 。
“One secret OLC opinion of particular significance, identified last year by Sen. Whitehouse, holds that executive orders, which are binding on executive branch agencies and are published in the Federal Register, can be unilaterally abrogated by the President without public notice.” “一個秘密法律顧問室的意見，具有特別重要的意義，確定了去年由參議員懷特豪斯認為，行政命令，這是有約束力的行政部門的機構和刊載在聯邦登記冊，可以單方面廢除了由主席未經公開的通知” 。
Such orders mean “Congress is left with no opportunity to respond to the change and to exercise its own authority as it sees fit.這些命令是指“國會是左沒有機會回應的變化，並行使自己的權威，因為它認為適當的意見。 Worse, the OLC policy … implies a right to actively mislead Congress and the public.”更糟的是，法律顧問室的政策… …意味著一種權利，積極誤導國會和公眾“ 。
Here’s something else that’s been waaaay underreported.這裡的一些其他的被waaaay不足。 As of January 2008, the Bush administration has issued 56 National Security Presidential Directives on a range of national security issues.截至2008年1月，布什政府已發出56個國家安全總統指令，對一系列國家安全問題。 Most of those directives have not been disclosed.大部分的這些指示沒有披露。 “Texts of the directives or descriptive fact sheets have been obtained for about a third of them (19),” Aftergood testified. “文本的指示或描述實況報導已獲得了約三分之一的受訪者（ 19 ） ， ” aftergood作證。 Only the titles have been obtained on 8 of the directives and absolutely no information is available for 10.只有標題，已經獲得了8日的指示，絕對沒有任何資料可供10 。
Congress has also gotten in on the action, having “participated in the propagation of secret law through the adoption of classified annexes to intelligence authorization of bills, for example.”大會還得到了在對行動後， “參加了在繁殖秘密法通過分類附件情報授權法案，例如” 。
Aftergood concluded his testimony, rightly observing that “it should be possible to identify a consensual middle ground that preserves the security of genuinely sensitive national security information while reversing the growth of secret laws.” aftergood結束了他的證詞，正確地觀察， “應該可以找出一個達成共識的中間地面維護安全的真正敏感的國家安全資料的同時，扭轉了增長的秘密的法律” 。
That’s why he’s pushing for the passage of the State Secrets Protection Act這就是為什麼他的推動通過了國家機密保護法 – S. 2533 — -美國2 533年- which aims to balance conflicting interests of secrecy and public disclosure.其目的是要平衡的利益衝突，保密和公開披露。
“The rule of law, after all, is one of the fundamental principles that unites us all, and one of the things we are committed to protect. “法治，歸根究柢，就是其中的基本原則，我們大家團結，和的事情之一，我們致力於保護。 Secret law is inconsistent with that commitment.”秘密法是不符合這一承諾“ 。
Of course, whenever someone points out how civil liberties have taken a back-seat in the name of “national security” under Bush, what’s the typical response of true believers?當然，每當有人指出，如何在公民自由採取了回到座位，在名稱的“國家安全”下，布什，什麼樣的典型的反應，真正的信徒？
They call talk radio, blog and write letters-to-the-editor about how “liberals” and “leftists” aid and abet terrorists with a naive insistence that America’s political leaders adhere to quaint luxuries like long-established Constitutional freedoms.他們呼籲對話電台，博客，並寫信至該編輯有關如何“民主派”和“左派”的援助和慫恿恐怖分子與天真的堅持，美國的政治領袖堅持以古樸的奢侈品一樣，成立已久的憲法自由。
The old saw — “loose lips sinks ships” — has been replaced by another now familiar brain-dead mantra: “if you’re doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about.” But the metastasizing growth of secret law pulls the rug out from underneath that flimsy argument.舊看到-“鬆散的嘴唇匯船” -已取代另一個現在熟悉腦死亡的口頭禪：“如果您正在做的沒有錯，你有沒有擔心”，但轉移性增長秘密法拉地毯從下方站不住腳的論點。 And for obvious reason: you can’t know what you don’t know.和明顯的理由：你可以不知道什麼你不知道。
See More: 看到更多的： USA News 美國新聞Have Your Say: How the Government Is Passing Secret Laws 你說：政府如何通過法律的秘密
Please note, only selected comments will be published.請注意，只有選定的評論將出版。
Or discuss this report in our our new forums 或討論這個報告在我們的我們的新論壇
One Response to “How the Government Is Passing Secret Laws” 1回應“ ，政府如何通過秘密法”
WeStillSleepin!? westillsleepin ！ ？
Posted: May 22nd, 2008 at 8:07 pm | 發布時間： 2008年5月22日在下午8時07分| Link to this 鏈接到本
Free Newsletter 免費通訊 
Related News 相關新聞
- US denies breaking torture laws after memos exposed美國否認打破酷刑的法律備忘錄後，暴露
- White House Can Keep Its Secrets - For Now白宮可以保持機密-現在
- Secret drug company payments to doctors remain legal in 48 states秘密製藥公司支付的醫生仍然是法律在48個國家
- Democrats Want to See Torture Memo民主黨人不願看到的酷刑備忘錄
- The CIA’s open secrets中央情報局的公開秘密
Email This Page To A Friend 電子郵件此頁給朋友
Latest Headlines 最新的新聞標題
- Burma ‘to allow in all aid workers’緬甸'允許在所有援助工作者'
- After Gitmo: The Government’s Responsibility後關塔那摩：政府的責任
- Iraqi TV station says US troops killed cameraman伊拉克電視台說，美軍打死的攝影師
- How the Government Is Passing Secret Laws政府如何通過法律的秘密
- Is Amsterdam turning into a prudish backwater?是阿姆斯特丹變成一個prudish回水？
- Here Come the Trials: A Military Commissions Cheat Sheet這裡來審判：一個軍事委員會小抄
- Criminal DNA left unchecked for 13 months罪犯DNA放任為13個月
- Olmert to US: Impose naval blockade on Iran奧爾默特美國：實行海上封鎖對伊朗
- DU Shells Used by US Worse Than Nuclear Weapons杜砲彈所使用的美國遜於核武器
- US Soldiers Did ‘Dirty Work’ for Chinese Interrogators美軍士兵沒有'骯髒的工作' ，為中國審問
More更多 Breaking News突發新聞
Archive 存檔
There will be no election, The Patriot Act will be FULLY inforced, and we will be living under Busche & Military Law in the very near future and Walmart will be the only thriving store as it will be ran by the secret soon to be open government!!將不會有任何的選舉，愛國者法案將得到充分inforced ，我們將生活在busche ＆軍事法在不久的將來和沃爾瑪將成為唯一欣欣向榮的商店，因為它會然由秘密不久將開放的政府！