Ruling Blocks Challenge to Wiretapping執政黨座挑戰竊聽
A federal appeals court said today that secrecy laws forced it to exclude critical evidence about the一家聯邦上訴法院今天說，保密法律迫使它排除在關鍵的證據表明，人們 National Security Agency國家安全局 ’s domestic eavesdropping program from being used by an Islamic charity in a lawsuit even though the mere existence of the program could no longer be considered a “state secret.” '國內監聽計劃被用於由一個伊斯蘭慈善機構打官司，即使僅僅是計劃的存在，可以不再被視為"國家機密" 。
The complex ruling was a victory for the Bush administration and signaled trouble for civil rights groups that are trying to show that the eavesdropping program was unconstitutional and to hold telecommunications companies liable for carrying it out.複雜的裁決是一個勝利，對布什政府來說並暗示麻煩民權團體表示，正嘗試表明，該監聽計劃是違憲，並持有電訊公司負責付諸實施。
The Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, a charity in Oregon, had perhaps the best evidence of anyone that it had been a target of the wiretapping program, based on a top secret document mistakenly given to the group in 2004.該哈拉曼伊斯蘭基金會，慈善團體在俄勒岡州，有可能是最好的證明任何人說，它已被當作目標的監聽程序，基於對絕密文件誤給予該組在2004年。
But the ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, based in San Francisco, found that evidence about the document could not be introduced in court because it fell under the “state secrets” privilege invoked by the government.但判決是由美國上訴法院第九巡迴，總部設在舊金山，發現的證據表明，人們文件無法推行在法庭上，因為這是屬於"國家機密"的權限引用由政府決定。 The court, reversing a lower court ruling, said the trial judge had made “a commendable effort to thread the needle” but that its final ruling in allowing the evidence was flawed.法院，扭轉了下級法院的裁決說，主審法官已經作出了"值得稱道的努力，以螺紋針" ，但其最終裁決，准許證據是站不住腳的。
However, the appeals court split off from its ruling a separate claim made by more than 40 groups against the telecommunications companies, and it has yet to rule on whether those lawsuits were covered by the state secrets privilege as well.不過，上訴法院分離出去，從自己的執政單獨提出的聲請，由40多個團體對電訊公司，以及它尚未作出裁決，無論這些訴訟所涉及的國家機密特權等。
A lawyer for the group leading that part of the lawsuit, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said in an interview that he was heartened by the appeals court’s clear rejection of the government’s claim everything involved in the eavesdropping program should be considered a state secret.一位律師，為集團領導這部分的訴訟中，電子疆界基金會，在接受採訪時說，他感到振奮的，由上訴法院的明確拒絕了政府的說法，一切都參與了竊聽計劃應該被視為一個國家秘密。 That could bode well for the remaining piece of the case, said the lawyer, Kevin Bankston.可一個好兆頭，其餘一塊的情況時說，律師，凱文班克斯頓。
Indeed, the appeals court spent most of its 27-page ruling explaining why the eavesdropping program should not be considered a state secret.事實上，上訴法院，大部分用於其27頁的裁決解釋為何監聽程序不應被視為國家機密。 It listed numerous public statements, including those by President Bush, former attorney general它列舉了許多公開聲明，其中包括布什總統，前總檢察長 Alberto R. Gonzales阿爾貝托岡薩雷斯傳譯 , and the director of the以及總的 Central Intelligence Agency中央情報部 , ， Michael V. Hayden邁克爾訴海登 , about details of the program.中，約有詳細的計劃。 And it said: “In light of extensive government disclosures” about the Terrorist Surveillance Program, “the government is hard-pressed to sustain its claim that the very subject matter of the litigation is a state secret.”它說： "鑑於廣泛的政府披露的"關於恐怖分子監視計劃， "政府是強硬派的壓力，以維持其聲稱非常此事的訴訟是一個國家秘密" 。
The judges on the panel were M. Margaret McKeown, Michael Daly Hawkins and Harry Pregerson.法官們對小組米吳麥基翁，邁克爾戴利霍金斯和Harry普雷格森。 Judges McKeown and Hawkins were nominated by President法官麥基翁和霍金斯獲得提名，由總統 Bill Clinton比爾克林頓 , which Judge Pregerson was a nominee of President ，其中法官普雷格森是一個被提名的總統 Jimmy Carter卡特 . 。
In presenting the charity case before the lower court, its lawyers had also argued that warrantless eavesdropping of telephone conversations between its directors and lawyers violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which established a secret court to issue top secret surveillance warrants authorized by a judge, The Associated Press reported.在介紹了這次慈善案件提交下級法院，其律師也辯稱，竊聽監聽的電話交談之間，其董事及律師違反了外國情報監視法，其中設立了一個秘密法院發出絕密情報偵察認股權證授權由一名法官，美聯社報導說。
Today, the appeals court did keep the charity’s lawsuit alive, if barely, by sending the lawsuit back to a trial court in Portland, Ore., to determine if that law governing the wiretapping of suspected terrorists trumps the state secrets law.今天，上訴法院維持了慈善的官司在世時，如果勉強進行，並派出了官司回來，一審判法庭在俄勒岡州的波特蘭，以確定是否該法律管的竊聽恐怖嫌疑人，佔盡優勢的國家機密法。
The appeals court said that “the FISA issue remains central to Al-Haramain’s ability to proceed with this lawsuit.”上訴法院說： " fisa的問題仍然是中央，以哈拉曼的能力進行這場訴訟" 。
Comment on 'Ruling Blocks Challenge to Wiretapping' : 評論執政座挑戰監聽' ：
Related News: 相關新聞：
