Since 2001, there has been mounting criticism of the state secrets privilege.

Washington, he told the court, was weighing whether to invoke the state secrets privilege.

So the state secrets privilege is sort of like kryptonite for democracy.

There's a hearing scheduled for June 23, where the judge will decide whether to honor government's state secrets privilege.

(This legal doctrine is known as the state secrets privilege.

In recent years, a number of commentators have called for legislative reforms to the state secrets privilege.

The government's motion to quash based on state secrets privilege was granted in part.

The states secrets privilege is not a mere "common law" privilege.

Intervention and assertion of the state secrets privilege, by the government, resulted in case dismissal.

However, the Supreme Court overturned the judgment under state secrets privilege.

But here, too, he said, "the critical facts necessary to adjudicate" the standing question "are subject to the state secrets privilege."

Judge Taylor has scheduled a separate argument next month to consider the government's motion to dismiss the case based on the state secrets privilege.

The state secrets privilege is an evidentiary rule created by United States legal precedent.

Once the court has agreed that evidence is subject to the state secrets privilege, it is excluded from the litigation.

Once the state secrets privilege is invoked, the lawsuit is dismissed and it's "case closed."

Also, while I recognize the state secrets privilege has it's benefits, it shouldn't trump constitutional protections and should never prevent a trial from going forward.

Under its original formulation, the state secrets privilege was meant only to exclude a very narrow class of evidence whose revelation would harm national security.

Judge Kennelly cited a "state secrets privilege" designed to protect national security from being harmed by lawsuits.

And as far as a possible day on in court goes, federal invocation of the state secrets privilege will neutralize any potential legal liability.

Invoking an unusual state secrets privilege, lawyers for the agency asked Judge Swain to dismiss the case immediately.

The conflict between the open court and state secrets privilege goes back to at least 1802 and Marbury v. Madison.

Ending secret government by invoking State Secrets Privilege.

Members of the Committee have also authored columns for major newspapers on watch lists, the state secrets privilege, habeas corpus, and public video surveillance.

At several points in the argument, Mr. Garre said that the so-called state secrets privilege was a litigation showstopper.

Burr's trial brought into question the ideas of executive privilege, state secrets privilege, and the independence of the executive.