Am unsure whether this has been discussed yet:
NYTimes Sues The Federal Government For Refusing To Reveal Its Secret Interpretation Of The PATRIOT Act (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111010/04043716279/nytimes-sues-federal-government-refusing-to-reveal-its-secret-interpretation-patriot-act.shtml)
from the secret-laws-and-secret-interpretations dept
We've been covering for a while now how Senators Ron Wyden and Mark Udall have been very concerned over the secret interpretation (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110525/15411414434/senators-reveal-that-feds-have-secretly-reinterpreted-patriot-act.shtml) the feds have of one piece of the PATRIOT Act. They've been trying to pressure the government into publicly explaining how they interpret the law, because they believe that it directly contrasts how most of the public (and many elected officials) believe the feds are interpreting the law. While the two Senators continue to put pressure on the feds (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110922/03520616050/senators-wyden-udall-to-doj-stop-saying-patriot-act-isnt-secret-law-when-you-know-it-is.shtml) and to hint at the feds' interpretation, just the fact that the government won't even explain its own interpretation of the law seems ridiculous.
(click for rest of article (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111010/04043716279/nytimes-sues-federal-government-refusing-to-reveal-its-secret-interpretation-patriot-act.shtml))
Briefly,but another discussion doesn't hurt.
And yeah. As I understand it, the secrecy part deals with how the powers under the Patriot Act are interpreted - basically, the government can actually do a whole lot more than the text of the law suggests. Secret laws...that's a really bad sign though.
Hmmm, yeah. Secret laws, or secretiveness about how they interpret and enforce the laws, are kind of a giant red flag of corruption.