Judge mulls two pretrial motions in domestic surveillance lawsuits

By Julia Cheever, Bay City News Service

December 22, 2006

SAN FRANCISCO (BCN) - A federal judge who is presiding over more than three dozen domestic surveillance lawsuits heard arguments on two pretrial motions in his San Francisco courtroom but deferred ruling on them.

U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker did not say when he will decide on the requests, which include a bid to have evidentiary documents unsealed and a motion by the American Civil Liberties Union and 12 citizens to send two of the cases back to San Francisco Superior Court, where they were originally filed.

The lawsuits were filed by citizens and groups in courts around the country against telecommunications companies including AT&T Corp., Verizon Communications Inc. and BellSouth Corp.

They accuse the corporations of aiding the National Security Agency in alleged illegal warrantless surveillance of Americans' phone calls and e-mails.

The cases were consolidated in Walker's court for purposes of judicial efficiency.

Also at yesterday's hearing, the judge agreed to a request by lawyers for the plaintiffs to postpone the next hearing in the cases from Feb. 1 to Feb. 13.

At that hearing, Walker will consider the government's request for a stay of trial court proceedings until the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rules on the government's claim that the lawsuits should be dismissed because state secrets could be revealed.

The U.S. Justice Department is appealing Walker's refusal in July to dismiss a lawsuit filed in federal court in San Francisco in January by the Electronic Frontier Foundation on behalf of four Californians.

The EFF case was the first lawsuit to be filed in the wake of news reports last year revealing the alleged surveillance program.

The appeals court decision on the state secrets claim is not expected until next spring or later.

Copyright © 2006 by Bay City News, Inc. -- Republication, Rebroadcast or any other Reuse without the express written consent of Bay City News, Inc. is prohibited.

####