AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.
Create a link to this page
Copy and paste this link tag into your Web page or blog:
On Independence Day 2002, multi-millionaire libertarian activist John Gilmore was forbidden to board a flight from either San Francisco or Oakland to Washington, D.C., when he refused to display a photo I.D. Gilmore, co-founder of the Electronic Freedom Foundation, filed a federal lawsuit challenging federal guidelines behind the widespread airline industry practice of demanding I.D. from air travelers. As the August-September 2003 issue of Reason pointed out, federal attorneys urged that the case be thrown out of court because "the ID regulation in question is 'sensitive security information' and must remain secret."
That demand gave rise to an interesting exchange between Federal District Judge Susan Illston and Justice Department lawyer Joe Lobue. When the judge asked, "What is the rule, if at all, concerning identification?" Lobue replied by summarizing the Bush administration's argument that requesting ID is a matter of public safety. "I understand, you said all of that [in opening arguments]," said Judge Illston. Pointing out that Gilmore's complaint that the federal rule in question was void because of vagueness, the judge continued: "You were saying the rule is not void for vagueness and we can move on. I just want to know what the rule is that isn't void." "If you are asking me to disclose what's in the security directives, I can't do it," insisted Lobue.
Now that the Gilmore case has moved to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the feds have asked that the court "keep ...
Source: HighBeam Research, They can't tell us what's secret.