WASHINGTON, Nov. 27, 2006
High Court Rules Against New York Times
Supreme Court Turns Down Paper In Leak Investigation, Refuses To Block Government's Review Of Records
-
New York Times reporter Judith Miller, right, leaves U. S. District Court in Washington with her attorney, Robert Bennett, on Oct. 12, 2005. The Supreme Court ruled against The New York Times on Nov. 27, 2006, refusing to block the government from reviewing telephone records of Miller and another Times reporter in a leak investigation concerning a terrorism-funding probe. (AP)
-
Interactive The Supreme Court History, traditions and key cases, plus what it takes to get on the bench.
"We remain hopeful that in the end, whether in the courts or in Congress, that right will be vindicated," Abrams said.
The current dispute stems from Shenon and Miller calling the two charities for comment after learning of the planned freeze on their assets from confidential sources.
The Justice Department says the reporters' calls tipped off the charities of upcoming government raids. A federal judge who ruled in the Times' favor said there is no evidence in the case even suggesting that the reporters tipped off the charities about the raids or that the reporters even knew the government would raid either charity.
In August, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that federal prosecutors could see the two reporters' phone records.
The government says the fact that the reporters relayed disclosures from a government source to "targets of an imminent law enforcement action substantially weakens any claim of freedom of the press."
At issue are 11 days of phone records the government plans to review from 2001 — for the dates Sept. 27-30, Dec. 1-3 and Dec. 10-13. In a declaration this month, Fitzgerald said the statute of limitations "on certain substantive offenses that the grand jury is investigating" will expire on Dec. 3 and Dec. 13 of this year.
The current leak probe is in Fitzgerald's capacity as U.S. Attorney in Chicago. The Libby prosecution is in Fitzgerald's role as a special counsel who was selected by a Justice Department superior to conduct that investigation.
©MMVI, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
More From Supreme Court
The secrets of tennis legend 
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 22 CommentsSaddam Hussein,For Alledgedly Trying To "Kill
My Daddy George H W Bush" since after all,it is
what is! Or can't the American people handled
the Truth when they hear it?
Posted by sandy5274 at 07:03 PM : Nov 27, 2006"
That is the truth, Sandy; but few Americans can handle the truth.
Our vengeful 'leader' use the US military as HIS PERSONAL ARMY (and got many Americans murdered and maimed) just so that he could avenge a mere alleged attempt upon his dad.
Thus, any member of the population at large with a web site could legitimately claim to be a member of the "press" and entitled to that consitutional protection. And thereby, should the advocates of press freedom from court subpoenas and testimony have their way, it would be trivially easy to avoid any prosecutorial attempt to gain testimony, in any criminal case.
Absurd, no?
Thus, any member of the population at large with a web site could legitimately claim to be a member of the "press" and entitled to that consitutional protection. And thereby, should the advocates of press freedom from court subpoenas and testimony have their way, it would be trivially easy to avoid any prosecutorial attempt to gain testimony, in any criminal case. Freedom for anyone. Any blogger!
Absurd, no?
Things will be rolling fast now, this leads directly to the Veep and Secretary of State, then NSA. Rumsfeld is not bound by executive privlege and announced his resignation before he can be held to oath in committee for other malfaesances.
The grand jury may get an extension for that very fact before it's all said and done.
Zelikow may fall under the same scrutiny and it might be why he also resigned...
I think you've overestimated him. I think he's young because what he's doing is imature. He's not intelligent because he can't defend his ideas. He spends most of his time looking at porn and posting the same message over and over on this forum. Both of these are very ************ activities as they involve no real exchange. Which brings me to my next point: he's lonely, pathetic, powerless and paranoid.
How am I doing so far?
House George W Bush & Vice Idiot *** Cheney
Mess in Iraq,A "Civil War" and so why tip toe
around about this and call it exactly what it
is,"George W Bush's Personal Vendetta Against
Saddam Hussein,For Alledgedly Trying To "Kill
My Daddy George H W Bush" since after all,it is
what is! Or can't the American people handled
the Truth when they hear it?
Posted by sandy5274 at 07:03 PM : Nov 27, 2006
That we as a species could be the complete undoing of our environment?
Don't underestimate us. Like Agent Smith said in the Matrix:
"Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area, and you multiply, and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague..."
Unless we turn away from fossil fuels, we will destroy everything we work for.
New Yorkers will have to visit Ground Zero underwater. The Bay Area of San Francisco will be a marine sanctuary. Walt Disney World will have to expand the 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea ride to encompass the entire park. The red light district in Amsterdam will have mermaid hookers.
This is no hoax. This is reality.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 22 Comments