You know, I just love the PACER system of public access to court electronic records. After registering, a body can uncover court records for just 8 cents a page. So if a body were to head over to the PACER web page for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, for instance, she or he might find the following docket information for the case of Al-Haramain Islamic, et al v. Bush — a case bundled together with Hepting v. AT&T which was trying to find out what kind of wiretapping without a warrant is being carried out against Americans by the Bush administration:
Docket entry for July 30, 2007:
7/30/07 Filed order (Deputy Clerk: md) This court is in receipt of
C-Span’s application for permission to videotape oral
argument for later broadcast. The application is granted.
This court reserves the right to modify or alter the terms
of both access and rebroadcast. If the parties wish to
respond to this order, they should do so in writing by the
close of business August 3, 2007. (Phoned/Faxed Csl &
Media) [06-17132, 06-17137, 06-36083] (pi) [06-17132
06-17137 06-36083]
Docket entry for July 31, 2007:
7/31/07 Filed order (Deputy Clerk: jf) The governments unopposed
motion regarding oral argument is granted. On August 15,
2007, the court will hear separate arguments in Hepting v.
ATT, Nos. 06-17132, 06-17137 and Al-Haramain Islamic
Foundation v. Bush, No. 06-36083. The government in Hepting
will take place first. The parties in Hepting will have
thirty minutes per side for argument, and the parties in
Al-Haramain will have twenty minutes per side for argument.
[06-17132, 06-17137, 06-36083] (sf) [06-17132 06-17137
06-36083]
That’s right — oral arguments in the cases of Hepting v. AT&T and Al Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Bush are headed for national television on August 15, 2007.
Or at least they were. How much do you want to bet that the Bush administration is going to try to quash the televised court hearings on warrantless surveillance? And how much do you want to bet that in their efforts to quash the televised court hearings, they’re going to cite the Protect America Act of 2007?
“Protect America,” my ass. The law should have been entitled the “Protect Our Asses Act” instead.
