bobbyw24
10-16-2009, 02:02 PM
Appellate Court Rules in Favor of Judicial Watch in SPP Lawsuit
I have great news to report in Judicial Watch's ongoing effort to bring transparency to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). As I told you a few weeks ago, Judicial Watch attorneys were in the DC Court of Appeals on September 21 in this matter, and their efforts paid off. Last Friday, the appellate court ruled that Judicial Watch indeed has standing to bring a lawsuit against the Commerce Department related to the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC), a group that advises the SPP.
Now we'll finally get our day in court and this is the essence of the argument we will make: The NACC must make its meetings open to the public and must release records relating to those meetings because it is subject to an open meetings law known as the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). As you may recall, Judicial Watch previously challenged the Cheney Energy Task Force under FACA in litigation that wound its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. And Hillary Clinton's Health Care Task Force also faced a challenge (from another group) under this open meetings law as well.
With respect to Judicial Watch's SPP lawsuit, the lower court had ruled that Judicial Watch lacked standing to bring the litigation because it's "injuries" were not redressable by the court. The appellate court rejected this argument. Here's an excerpt from the court ruling, which you can read in full by clicking here:
To satisfy the constitutional standing requirement, familiar doctrine requires a plaintiff to allege an injury in fact that is fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and that will likely be redressed by a favorable decision on the merits. Here the injury requirement is obviously met. In the context of a FACA claim, an agency's refusal to disclose information that the act requires be revealed constitutes a sufficient injury...As Judicial Watch has standing to pursue its FACA claim, and the merits remain an open question, the judgment of the district court is reversed and the case is Remanded.
So why are we so aggressively trying open up the SPP Process?
CORRUPTION CHRONICLES
Millions Of Foreign Visitors Stay In U.S. Undetected
Arizona's Tough Employer Sanction Law Not Enforced
FDA’s $7 Million Cover Up
Mexicans Say Amnesty Will Boost Illegal Immigration
Rampant Fla. Corruption Requires Grand Jury
Troop Funds Honor Kennedy
Colorado Wants Special Tuition Class For Illegal Aliens
Well, first off, while proponents of the SPP suggest that the goal of the whole effort is to foster better coordination between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, some believe the SPP may sacrifice U.S. sovereignty, which would obviously be a very serious problem. (The SPP is supported by some as a first step to a "North American Union.")
From the documents we've already uncovered, we do know that conversations are ongoing between the three participating nations at the highest levels of government regarding policies that impact all Americans, from healthcare to immigration. And until Judicial Watch got involved, these conversations were being conducted behind closed doors. (Despite government stonewalling, Judicial Watch has already managed to force thousands of documents into the public domain. Click here to check them out.)
And how does the NACC relate to the SPP? The American component of the NACC is made up of key corporations and was set up by the government to advise the SPP through the U.S. Chamber of Congress. So far, the NACC has provided over 50 recommendations for action to the SPP. Judicial Watch wishes to gain membership to the group and gain access to documents about its meetings and activities. The NACC most recently provided recommendations to the North American Leaders Summit (which is now what the SPP is called by the Obama administration). The last North American Leaders Summit was just this past August – so the process continues.
Of course, we are very much looking forward to making out case in court. But President Obama could help things along if he would merely keep his own promise to provide "unprecedented" levels of transparency to the inner-workings of government, including the SPP.
Judicial Watch Uncovers Illegal Alien Drop Houses in Phoenix, Arizona
Illegal alien smugglers, known as "coyotes," prey upon illegals desperate to cross the nation's southern border, often abusing their victims and holding them hostage in "drop-houses" for large sums of money once they reach the United States. These human traffickers are ususally in the employ of Mexican drug cartels. This is a growing problem along the nation's southern border, but perhaps most especially in Phoenix, Arizona, whic
http://www.judicialwatch.org/weeklyupdate/2009/42-towards-north-american-union
I have great news to report in Judicial Watch's ongoing effort to bring transparency to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). As I told you a few weeks ago, Judicial Watch attorneys were in the DC Court of Appeals on September 21 in this matter, and their efforts paid off. Last Friday, the appellate court ruled that Judicial Watch indeed has standing to bring a lawsuit against the Commerce Department related to the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC), a group that advises the SPP.
Now we'll finally get our day in court and this is the essence of the argument we will make: The NACC must make its meetings open to the public and must release records relating to those meetings because it is subject to an open meetings law known as the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). As you may recall, Judicial Watch previously challenged the Cheney Energy Task Force under FACA in litigation that wound its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. And Hillary Clinton's Health Care Task Force also faced a challenge (from another group) under this open meetings law as well.
With respect to Judicial Watch's SPP lawsuit, the lower court had ruled that Judicial Watch lacked standing to bring the litigation because it's "injuries" were not redressable by the court. The appellate court rejected this argument. Here's an excerpt from the court ruling, which you can read in full by clicking here:
To satisfy the constitutional standing requirement, familiar doctrine requires a plaintiff to allege an injury in fact that is fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and that will likely be redressed by a favorable decision on the merits. Here the injury requirement is obviously met. In the context of a FACA claim, an agency's refusal to disclose information that the act requires be revealed constitutes a sufficient injury...As Judicial Watch has standing to pursue its FACA claim, and the merits remain an open question, the judgment of the district court is reversed and the case is Remanded.
So why are we so aggressively trying open up the SPP Process?
CORRUPTION CHRONICLES
Millions Of Foreign Visitors Stay In U.S. Undetected
Arizona's Tough Employer Sanction Law Not Enforced
FDA’s $7 Million Cover Up
Mexicans Say Amnesty Will Boost Illegal Immigration
Rampant Fla. Corruption Requires Grand Jury
Troop Funds Honor Kennedy
Colorado Wants Special Tuition Class For Illegal Aliens
Well, first off, while proponents of the SPP suggest that the goal of the whole effort is to foster better coordination between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, some believe the SPP may sacrifice U.S. sovereignty, which would obviously be a very serious problem. (The SPP is supported by some as a first step to a "North American Union.")
From the documents we've already uncovered, we do know that conversations are ongoing between the three participating nations at the highest levels of government regarding policies that impact all Americans, from healthcare to immigration. And until Judicial Watch got involved, these conversations were being conducted behind closed doors. (Despite government stonewalling, Judicial Watch has already managed to force thousands of documents into the public domain. Click here to check them out.)
And how does the NACC relate to the SPP? The American component of the NACC is made up of key corporations and was set up by the government to advise the SPP through the U.S. Chamber of Congress. So far, the NACC has provided over 50 recommendations for action to the SPP. Judicial Watch wishes to gain membership to the group and gain access to documents about its meetings and activities. The NACC most recently provided recommendations to the North American Leaders Summit (which is now what the SPP is called by the Obama administration). The last North American Leaders Summit was just this past August – so the process continues.
Of course, we are very much looking forward to making out case in court. But President Obama could help things along if he would merely keep his own promise to provide "unprecedented" levels of transparency to the inner-workings of government, including the SPP.
Judicial Watch Uncovers Illegal Alien Drop Houses in Phoenix, Arizona
Illegal alien smugglers, known as "coyotes," prey upon illegals desperate to cross the nation's southern border, often abusing their victims and holding them hostage in "drop-houses" for large sums of money once they reach the United States. These human traffickers are ususally in the employ of Mexican drug cartels. This is a growing problem along the nation's southern border, but perhaps most especially in Phoenix, Arizona, whic
http://www.judicialwatch.org/weeklyupdate/2009/42-towards-north-american-union