Judge Halts Release of NYC Search Papers
NEW YORK (AP) - A federal judge blocked the release of information about random bag searches in New York City subways, saying officials may be able to prove that the success of the program depends on its secrecy.
U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman's decision Friday overruled a magistrate judge who had ordered the city to disclose details such as the number of days during a one-month period that searches were conducted. Berman said the magistrate judge did not adequately consider the city's concerns. He said it would serve little purpose to allow the New York Civil Liberties Union, which sued claiming the searches were unconstitutional, to see sensitive information about the searches before public officials and experts testify at a hearing next month. ``The city may be able to demonstrate that the Subway Search Program effectively deters terrorism precisely because it is random and unpredictable,'' the judge wrote in a decision released Friday.
And there's no reason to show the ACLU anything. If they want to argue the searches are illegal, fine, make the argument in court. But they don't have any standing to look at information gleaned from searches. | The bag searches in nation's largest subway system began last month after the deadly mass transit bombings in London.
Christopher Dunn, associate legal director of the NYCLU, said the information was critical to deciding whether the subway searches are effective and constitutional. ``If the city's not prepared to release this information, we are exploring ways to obtain it ourselves,'' he said. ``Many New Yorkers are very unhappy about this program. We've gotten a constant stream of complaints about the program.''
A city law office spokeswoman did not immediately return a telephone message seeking comment.
In its lawsuit, the NYCLU maintained that most entrances to the city's 468 subway stations had no checkpoints and that the program was so ineffective that innocent riders were subjected to pointless and unconstitutional invasions of privacy. Lawyers for the city argued that the program was effective largely because of its unpredictability.
Something you can't expect the ACLU to understand, let alone take seriously. |
Posted by: Steve White 2005-08-27 |