Why Was The DOJ So Fearful Of Its Terrorist Watchlist Guidelines Being Made Public?

from the not-because-it-helps-terrorists dept

Thu, Jul 24th 2014 11:09am — Mike Masnick

Having already discussed The Intercept's publication of the federal government's guidelines for declaring people terrorists to put on its various watchlists (including the infamous "no fly list"), it's raising some serious questions about why the DOJ had been fighting so hard to keep these guidelines from coming out. As we've discussed, in basically any case challenging the various government watchlists, the DOJ has freaked out and claimed "state secrets" to try to get the cases thrown out entirely.

Just a few months ago, Attorney General Eric Holder directly claimed that revealing these guidelines would be helping the terrorists. In that legal filing, Holder does the "state secrets" dance and then says:

I agree with the FBI that the Watchlisting Guidance, although unclassified, contains national security information that, if disclosed, for the reasons discussed in the FBI's classified declaration, could cause significant harm to national security.... If the Guidance were released, it would provide a clear roadmap to undermine the Government's screening efforts, a key counterterrorism measure, and thus, its disclosure reasonably could be expected to cause significant harm to national security.

Of course, now that the Watchlisting Guidance is out, we can take a look and see if that's actually true. And... Holder's statements, not surprisingly, appear to be completely bogus. The Guidelines are so vague and so broad that it gives no real indication of how to get around them or whether or not any particular person is likely to be placed on the list.

What the guidelines do show, however, is the level of extra scrutiny people on the list are subject to. And, as we noted, much of that certainly appears to violate the 4th Amendment (or, at the very least, open itself up to a pretty clear 4th Amendment challenge in the courts). So, once again, it seems like Holder's real reason to declare "state secrets" had little to do with "national security" and a hell of a lot to do with "DOJ security" in keeping its illegal and unconstitutional practices from further public and judicial scrutiny.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: doj, eric holder, no fly list, terrorism watchlist, terrorist, tsdb, watchlist, watchlisting guidance

32 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

The First Word

“

Holder

Eric Holder is, like most of the current President's appointees, the most incompetent person ever to hold the position he was appointed to.

And... yes... just this month, he played "the race card"... which like mentioning Nazi's online... means you've already lost the argument.

If you can't agree or disagree with someone's philosophy, opinion, actions or otherwise without invoking race, or defend YOUR OWN philosophy, opinion, or actions without invoking race - then you've lost.

—Jasmine Charter

”

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 11:14am

If anyone thinks they're going to provide Americans a real list of what they're doing you're extremely gullible .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 12:34pm
  
  Re:
  Look at who and what we keep voting in...
  
  WE ARE extremely gullible.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 3:03pm
    
    Re:Look at who and what we keep voting in...
    Like we have a choice?
    
    Nobody with any honor or integrity wants to run for office in this country.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
AricTheRed (profile), 24 Jul 2014 @ 11:21am

this revelation...
"...it seems like Holder's real reason to declare "state secrets" had little to do with "national security" and a hell of a lot to do with "DOJ security" in keeping its illegal and unconstitutional practices from further public and judicial scrutiny."

.gov guidelines are about as revelational as the ending of a Friday the 13th movie.

Shame on them!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eponymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 11:25am

It could just be that tye DOJ belives the courts to be an "extremist forum" and any legal pushback they'll recieve for their overstep(s) to be a blow to "natonal security" for checks and balances is aiding the enemy dontchaknow!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Edward Teach, 24 Jul 2014 @ 1:06pm
  
  Re:
  Arrr, matey, could be! They should just open their gobs and say what they mean, rather than engaging in heathen palaver like "state secrets".
  
  Still, th' Feebies themselves distrustin the courts? Tis a cold day in Hell, lad!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 11:25am

when anyone is up to 'no good', they want to keep things hidden. when a 'governmental security force', one that is supposed to be working for the good of the people, is up to no good, it will go to whatever lengths it must to cover that up, particularly if it has been doing something for a political individual or private industry!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 11:35am

They were afraid their fascist fuckwittery would be discovered?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ted Louise Hammer, 24 Jul 2014 @ 11:37am

The U.S. was formed out of a *rebellion*. It's about damned time we have our *revolution* and start taking back what is ours. Put an end to all this war on terror and drugs nonsense, and funnel the money back to education, healthcare, and industry and be the country we always thought we were.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 12:06pm
  
  Re: Ok...
  ... I think that's enough. Congratulations, you're on it!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 12:35pm
  
  Re: Calling your bluff
  How many techdirt posts have at least one commenter saying, "The time for revolution is now!" or "We need a revolution!".
  
  Empty words.
  
  If you want to see *real* change, it is probably easier to affect change within the current system.
  
  Now before anyone jumps all over that last statement, let me be clear: I'm not talking about calling your local representative or any of that nonsense.
  
  I'm talking about trolling: Convert to Islam and start using the name "Eric Holder" as your alias.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Squirrels Without Borders, 24 Jul 2014 @ 11:38am

If the Guidance were released, it would provide a clear roadmap to undermine the Government's screening efforts, a key counterterrorism measure, and thus, its disclosure reasonably could be expected to cause significant harm to national security.

I think he is at least partially correct. It gives litigants a clear roadmap to [rightly] undermine the Government's [illegal] screening efforts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Padpaw (profile), 24 Jul 2014 @ 11:42am

If the ignorant masses found out they have been classified as terrorists for asinine reasons I am sure they might get a little upset.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 11:42am

Over classification is a drug addiction for government officials. They can't get enough of it. Even discussions about over classification, are classified.

The real reason for over classification is secrecy. If laws and executive orders don't full comply with the US Constitution, just keep those laws a secret.

If you're blowing American taxpayer money left and right like a drunk sailor and using that money to spy on the very people funding the project. Just keep the Black Budget a secret.

Heck, even trade agreements are classified these days. If you're attempting to bone people all over the world, by-passing their democratically elected representatives using international corporate tribunals. Just keep the trade agreements a secret.

Ruling from the shadows is so much easier. You can lie and deny everything... unless Edward Snowden comes along and starts shining a spot light round.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nasch (profile), 25 Jul 2014 @ 11:04am
  
  Re:
  The real reason for over classification is secrecy.
  
  Not to disagree with your overall point, but the reason for all classification is secrecy - that's kind of what it means.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 11:45am

Parallel to that
Isn't it obvious? He is using a parallel construction to prevent everyone from knowing about the parallel constructions where the Feds are telling LEO's to lie in court about the sources that create the original parallels. If that does not work in state court, he just has the US Marshals steal the documents and remove them to a more cooperative, yet parallel federal facility.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bshock, 24 Jul 2014 @ 11:49am

Sorry
I'd like to add a snarky-yet-insightful comment about this situation, but I'm afraid I'd end up on a terrorist watchlist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Padpaw (profile), 24 Jul 2014 @ 10:30pm
  
  Re: Sorry
  visiting sites that disagree with how the ruling class does things gets you on that list automatically.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
art guerrilla (profile), 24 Jul 2014 @ 12:33pm

why ? ? ?
because MOTHER FUCKIN' EAGLES, bitchez ! ! !

geez, don't you moon flowers know nuthin' ? ? ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jasmine Charter, 24 Jul 2014 @ 12:48pm

Holder
Eric Holder is, like most of the current President's appointees, the most incompetent person ever to hold the position he was appointed to.

And... yes... just this month, he played "the race card"... which like mentioning Nazi's online... means you've already lost the argument.

If you can't agree or disagree with someone's philosophy, opinion, actions or otherwise without invoking race, or defend YOUR OWN philosophy, opinion, or actions without invoking race - then you've lost.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Someantimalwareguy, 24 Jul 2014 @ 1:59pm
  
  Re: Holder
  But, if you are discussing the Nazis and their crimes you have not invoked Godwin's law. And if the racist shoe fits, he might actually have a point to make.
  
  Overreach much Jasmine?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - MonkeyFracasJr (profile), 24 Jul 2014 @ 2:37pm
    
    Re: race
    Race is never a valid argument. Period.
    
    I do not intend that point as an anti-racism argument. A person's genetic ethnicity is WHOLLY IRRELEVANT. There are many cultural and societal differences among people, such as religious or financial background, access to education or relative learning ability (etc.), that may have strong bearing on a given situation. But to say that any of those cultural or societal differences are the strict result that a person is a member of any general genetic grouping is patently false.
    
    "It's not the color of a man's skin it's the man inside that you must know." -- Someone Said
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Someantimalwareguy, 24 Jul 2014 @ 3:32pm
      
      Re: Re: race
      My point was not to support focusing on race in an argument. I do however make the case that Holder may have a valid point to make
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 7:41pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: race
        Some people have no concept of a middle ground. It's all black and white to them (no pun intended). Just because some people cry racism at the drop of a hat doesn't mean that racism doesn't exist.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 4:38pm
  
  Re: Holder
  Frankly I love to hear these guys cry racism. They have cried wolf so much now that it is losing the power it once had. Hopefully soon we can focus on the issues rather than the false cries of racism.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nasch (profile), 25 Jul 2014 @ 11:00am
  
  Re: Holder
  Eric Holder is, like most of the current President's appointees, the most incompetent person ever to hold the position he was appointed to.
  
  Eh.... I'm not so sure, I think Alberto Gonzalez might have been even more incompetent.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 1:09pm

You have hit on the real reason already in the article. Time and again this has turned up to be the hidden purpose, is not National Security but rather the National Security requires this and that item to be secret to prevent exposure to just how badly the government has chosen to ignore the Constitutional protections granted every citizen and state.

The National Security card is a very easy and convenient way to remove cases from court without having to fight over it or reveal anything in the line of evidence.

Without exposure of just what they are doing, you can not bring a valid reason to court to fight it. When National Security doesn't work, then stonewalling works pretty good to prevent it from coming out.

I am beginning to view the Obama administration in the same light as the Nixon administration. There's just too much being hidden consistently, not to suspect there are some well hidden things going on that shouldn't be. The more is revealed, the stronger my suspicions are. I dare say I am not the only one in this nation with this viewpoint.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 6:28pm
  
  Re:
  By that description, with which I wholly concur, the US Government, via all its various initialed forms, is a black hole, and the Internet is entropy, and the challenge is to prevent the black hole from eating the entropy?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2014 @ 1:30pm

Sooooo, about the kings new clothes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ECA (profile), 24 Jul 2014 @ 3:18pm

how many people in..
How many people in TOP positions have ANY training in that job??
After each name, All I tend to see is the word, LAWYER..which does not tell me if the person can Fill a bag with groceries..or balance HIS OWN check book.

i love the watch list..
A list of names, that could correspond to as many as 100 people..With no Identifiers as to the PERSON they are REALLY listing..
no picture, no finger prints, no descriptions..
JUST a name.. Thats like Yelling the name of a person in a MALL..."HEY BILL", and 3-4 people turn to see who is yelling at them..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mark Noo, 25 Jul 2014 @ 9:46am

First Congress questioned Eric Holder and now TechDirt. It is unfair. He is a victim, just like Hillary is a victim of Benghazi.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GEMont (profile), 25 Jul 2014 @ 4:29pm

DOJ, doh!
"So, once again, it seems like Holder's real reason to declare "state secrets" had little to do with "national security" and a hell of a lot to do with "DOJ security" in keeping its illegal and unconstitutional practices from further public and judicial scrutiny."

Wow! Never saw that coming!

I mean.... hooda thunk it huh!!!

The Department of Justice, dealing in Injustice and Lying and Covering things up.... why, its enough to make one wonder just who the DOJ is actually working for and for that matter, exactly what their job really is.

Its pretty obvious who they're working against, but its no longer readily apparent what their mandate actually is.

Too bad there's no such thing as a Tax Strike.

You know, the kinda strike where everyone just withholds their taxes until such time as they get a legally binding assurance from the Most Transparent Administration In American History that no taxpayer's money will be used to fund such agency corruption in future.

That'd really piss off the greedy bastards.

Sigh. Oh well, like Justice In America, a Tax Strike is a nice Fantasy to imagine.

---
[ link to this | view in chronology ]