Showing posts with label dismisses. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dismisses. Show all posts

Friday, April 4, 2014

Judge dismisses lawsuit over drone strikes







FILE – In this image taken from video and released by SITE Intelligence Group on Monday, Nov. 8, 2010, Anwar al-Awlaki speaks in a video message posted on radical websites. On Friday, April 4, 2014, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer dismissed a lawsuit against Obama administration officials for the 2011 drone-strike killings of three U.S. citizens in Yemen, including U.S.-born al-Qaida leader al-Awlaki. Collyer said the case raises serious constitutional issues and is not easy to answer, but that “on these facts and under this circuit’s precedent,” the court will grant the Obama administration’s request. (AP Photo/SITE Intelligence Group, File) NO SALES, MANDATORY CREDIT





FILE – In this image taken from video and released by SITE Intelligence Group on Monday, Nov. 8, 2010, Anwar al-Awlaki speaks in a video message posted on radical websites. On Friday, April 4, 2014, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer dismissed a lawsuit against Obama administration officials for the 2011 drone-strike killings of three U.S. citizens in Yemen, including U.S.-born al-Qaida leader al-Awlaki. Collyer said the case raises serious constitutional issues and is not easy to answer, but that “on these facts and under this circuit’s precedent,” the court will grant the Obama administration’s request. (AP Photo/SITE Intelligence Group, File) NO SALES, MANDATORY CREDIT





In this Thursday, May 1, 2008 photo, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer attends a ceremony at the federal courthouse in Washington. On Friday, April 4, 2014, Collyer dismissed a lawsuit against Obama administration officials for the 2011 drone-strike killings of three U.S. citizens in Yemen, including an al-Qaida cleric. Collyer said the case raises serious constitutional issues and is not easy to answer, but that “on these facts and under this circuit’s precedent,” the court will grant the Obama administration’s request. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)













Buy AP Photo Reprints







(AP) — A federal judge on Friday dismissed a lawsuit against Obama administration officials for the 2011 drone-strike killings of three U.S. citizens in Yemen, including an al-Qaida cleric.


U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer said the case raises serious constitutional issues and is not easy to answer, but that “on these facts and under this circuit’s precedent,” the court will grant the Obama administration’s request.


The suit was against then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, then-CIA Director David Petraeus and two commanders in the military’s Special Operations forces.


Permitting a lawsuit against individual officials “under the circumstances of this case would impermissibly draw the court into ‘the heart of executive and military planning and deliberation,’” said Collyer. She said the suit would require the court to examine national security policy and the military chain of command as well as operational combat decisions regarding the designation of targets and how best to counter threats to the United States.


“Defendants must be trusted and expected to act in accordance with the U.S. Constitution when they intentionally target a U.S. citizen abroad at the direction of the president and with the concurrence of Congress,” said Collyer. “They cannot be held personally responsible in monetary damages for conducting war.” The lawsuit sought unspecified damages.


At oral arguments last July, the judge challenged the Obama administration’s position repeatedly, pointedly asking “where was the due process in this case?” for the now-dead U.S. citizens targeted in the drone attacks. When an administration lawyer said there were checks in place, including reviews done by the executive branch, Collyer said “No, no, no, no, no,” declaring that “the executive is not an effective check on the executive” when it comes to protecting constitutional rights. But in Friday’s ruling, it was clear that the administration’s arguments had a strong impact on the judge, who was appointed by President George W. Bush.


The government argued that the issue is best left to Congress and the executive branch, not judges, and that courts have recognized that the defense of the nation should be left to those political branches.


Anwar al-Awlaki’s classification as a key leader raises fundamental questions regarding the conduct of armed conflict, Collyer’s 41-page opinion stated. The Constitution commits decision-making in this area to the president, as commander in chief, and to Congress, the judge said.


U.S.-born al-Qaida leader al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, an al-Qaida propagandist, were killed in a drone strike in September 2011. Al-Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman, was killed the following month.


The lawsuit was filed by Nasser al-Awlaki — Anwar’s father and the teen’s grandfather — and by Sarah Khan, Samir Khan’s mother


Al-Awlaki had been linked to the planning and execution of several attacks targeting U.S. and Western interests, including a 2009 attempt on Christmas Day on a Detroit-bound airliner and a 2010 plot against cargo planes.


“The fact is that Anwar al-Awlaki was an active and exceedingly dangerous enemy of the United States, irrespective of his distance, location, and citizenship,” said Collyer. “As evidenced by his participation in the Christmas Day attack, Anwar al-Awlaki was able to persuade, direct, and wage war against the United States from his location in Yemen, without being present on an official battlefield or in a hot war zone.”


She said that the U.S. government moved against al-Awlaki as authorized by the defendants and she said the officials acted in accordance with the Authorization for Use of Military Force, which was enacted by Congress after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.


Also impacting the outcome was the type of lawsuit, commonly known as a Bivens action, which seeks to hold liable individual officials as opposed to being a legal action against an entity. Bevens actions have a high legal hurdle to meet in order to survive.


“Allowing plaintiffs to bring a Bivens action against defendants would hinder their ability in the future to act decisively and without hesitation in defense of U.S. interests,” Collyer said.


“Although it gave this court pause, a plaintiff’s U.S. citizenship has not affected the analysis of Bivens special factors by the circuit courts,” she added.


“The Supreme Court has never suggested that citizenship matters to a claim under Bivens,” said Collyer’s opinion, quoting from a federal appeals court case.


Associated Press




Politics Headlines



Judge dismisses lawsuit over drone strikes

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

CNN"s Cuomo Dismisses Challenge to Birth Control Mandate as "Growing Distraction" From Fixing ObamaCare


CNN’s Chris Cuomo called the legal challenge to ObamaCare’s birth control mandate a “growing distraction from dealing with the problems of ObamaCare” on Wednesday’s New Day.


It also raises the question at what point do you stop challenging the law? At what point do you accept that this was passed, it was tested by the Supreme Court?” he asked. “To me, it’s a growing distraction from dealing with the problems of Obamacare.” [Video below the break. Audio here.]


Opponents of the mandate insist the case is about matters of religious liberty and conscience, but Cuomo argued ObamaCare is the law of the land.


“You talk about good in standing law. It was already vetted by the Supreme Court, and that you just leave it alone and figure out its implementation,” he insisted. This isn’t the first time Cuomo has implied at least a partial support of ObamaCare.


After millions were losing or were set to lose their insurance because of ObamaCare, Cuomo insisted that “You cannot measure the law by what’s happening with this one slice of the people potentially.” He added that “Some people are going to have to pay some more, but over time it evens out.”


Cuomo also told a conservative guest last week that “You have to have the government involved with health care.”
 




NewsBusters blogs



CNN"s Cuomo Dismisses Challenge to Birth Control Mandate as "Growing Distraction" From Fixing ObamaCare

Saturday, November 23, 2013

Russia dismisses intl tribunal ruling on Greenpeace"s Arctic Sunrise ship and crew

Russia dismisses intl tribunal ruling on Greenpeace"s Arctic Sunrise ship and crew
http://isbigbrotherwatchingyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/2ad92__russia-dismisses-ruling-greenpeace.si.jpg



Published time: November 23, 2013 18:06

Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise (RIA Novosti / Sergey Eshenko)

Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise (RIA Novosti / Sergey Eshenko)




Russia is not going to comply with a maritime tribunal’s ruling to release the Greenpeace vessel as the issue does not fall within its jurisdiction, said a Kremlin official, accusing the activists of using ‘unsuitable means’ for implementing their idea.


“We have no plans to participate in the process”, Sergey Ivanov, the head of the Russian Presidential administration told journalists in St. Petersburg on Saturday. According to a 1982 convention Russia can ignore the findings of the Tribunal on the Law for the Sea if it concerns Russia’s sovereign rights and jurisdiction.


Ivanov was referring to the Friday’s ruling of the tribunal in Hamburg that ordered Russia to allow the Greenpeace Arctic Sunrise vessel and the 30 activists who were onboard to leave the country for a bond of €3.6 million (about $ 5 million).


The vessel is currently moored in the Russian port of Murmansk while the international maritime court still has to rule on the legality of Russia seizing the ship.


Ivanov reaffirmed Russia’s dismissal of the ruling adding that the “question will be solved in a judicial, not political manner, [and] based on Russian legislation, not someone’s political wishes.”


“There’s a legal procedure and we’re observing it strictly,” he said adding that he believes the activists will leave Russia as soon as all legal issues are completed.


Ivanov noted that their ‘noble idea’ was implemented using ‘unsuitable means’ and described the actions of the activists who he called ‘environmentalists or pseudo environmentalists’ as ‘PR for profit.’


Russian President Vladimir Putin, speaking at the Russian literary meeting in Moscow on Thursday said that the actions of the Greenpeace environmentalists threatened the lives of those who worked on the oil rig.


“When [somebody] is climbing on the platform, [they] are creating an emergency situation, the operator [of the rig] could have made more than one error. They are distracted from the ongoing work. Among other things, there were divers underwater and their life was in danger,” said Putin.


Thirty Arctic Sunrise activists including two journalists were detained after they scaled the Prirazlomnaya oil platform in the Pechora Sea in September in order to stop its operations.  Twenty nine of them have been released on bail, however they face jail terms of up to seven years if found guilty of hooliganism and cannot leave Russia till the court proceedings are over.


The detention of the Arctic Thirty has sparked sharp criticism from the group’s supporters and human rights organizations.




RT – News




Read more about Russia dismisses intl tribunal ruling on Greenpeace"s Arctic Sunrise ship and crew and other interesting subjects concerning NSA at TheDailyNewsReport.com

Friday, June 21, 2013

Putin dismisses reports of spat with Merkel over looted art


Russia’s President Vladimir Putin (R) and Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel attend a session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in St. Petersburg, June 21, 2013.


Credit: Reuters/Alexander Demianchuk




Reuters: Arts



Putin dismisses reports of spat with Merkel over looted art

Saturday, June 8, 2013

Court dismisses Bloomberg suit against swaps regulator




WASHINGTON | Sat Jun 8, 2013 11:19am EDT



WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The top U.S. derivatives regulator won a legal victory over Bloomberg LP late on Friday when a court dismissed a case the data vendor had filed that claimed a new rule on trading swaps would hurt its business.


Bloomberg is one of a dozen or so providers launching a platform on which to trade swaps, as regulators across the world crack down on the $ 630 trillion market to prevent a repeat of the 2008 financial crisis.


But that effort would be hurt by a new rule from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission which will force buyers and sellers of swaps to set aside enough money – or margin – to cope with the impact of a deal falling apart, Bloomberg had argued.


That is because the margin on a swap should be enough to cover five days of unwinding the position, but only one day for futures, a similar type of product traded on rival exchanges, making them cheaper to use.


The court said, however, that Bloomberg had provided no evidence that this requirement would hurt its business.


“Bloomberg … simply assume the worst-case scenario … without grounding their assumption in the actual behavior,” it said in its ruling.


On another point, it said that the “plaintiff’s contentions in this regard are remarkably perfunctory and devoid of factual support.”


Bloomberg could not be reached for comment.


Commissioner Bart Chilton said in a statement that the CFTC could focus on the task ahead of tightening regulations of swaps now that “another attempt to second-guess regulators on financial reform measures sought by Congress and President (Barack) Obama” was behind it.


Underlying the lawsuit is a looming battle between exchanges and investment banks over who rules the lucrative derivatives market, a vast playground for speculators, parts of which were long unregulated.


Exchanges, which dominate the futures markets, have been regulated for decades and now operate at a lower cost because of the CFTC’s rule.


The banks hold sway over the swaps market, and fear clients will defect to the exchanges, hurting their revenues as well as the trading platforms – called Swap Execution Facilities (SEF) – Bloomberg and others want to launch.


Bloomberg is a competitor of Thomson Reuters Corp (TRI.TO).


The case is Bloomberg LP v United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 13-52


(Reporting by Douwe Miedema; Editing by Vicki Allen)





Reuters: Business News



Court dismisses Bloomberg suit against swaps regulator