Talk:State Secrets Protection Act

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

What does this bill say / what would it do?

What does this bill say and how would it reform the exercise of the state secrets privilege? The article doesn't say. This would be nice to have in an encyclopedia article about the bill. 208.2.205.162 (talk) 13:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An excerpt from the press release by Senator Kennedy that the article refers to:

The Act requires courts to examine the evidence for which the privilege is claimed, in order to determine whether the executive branch has validly invoked the privilege. The court must look at the actual evidence, not just government affidavits about the evidence, and make its own assessment of whether information is covered by the privilege. Only after a court has considered the evidence and found that it provides a valid legal defense can it dismiss a claim on state secrets grounds.

I am not a lawyer. My layperson understanding of the legislation is that it allows the judicial brach to securely evaluate the executive branch's claim of state secret privilege as it relates to civil cases against the US government. My understanding is that before this legislation, the government can and did claim that evidence relating to the civil suit would contain national secrets to get cases dismissed without anyone outside of the executive branch evaluating whether the claim is true or not. In fact the case that sets the precedent of state secret privilege, United_States_v._Reynolds, was itself an abuse since the supposedly secret crash report has now been declassified and did not contain any secrets. I do not feel comfortable adding a summary to the article. Someone more lawyerly than me who really knows what they're talking about should do it. DavidCreswick (talk) 23:02, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on State Secrets Protection Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090325192556/http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200902/021109b.html to http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200902/021109b.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:26, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]