Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
General Michael Hayden, Director of the CIA, has now issued an order to all CIA personnel to preserve and maintain all documents, information and evidence relating to any detainee held by the CIA or at GTMO. See page 23 of the pdf of this motion filed in court today. That was easy. And yet in the several years of internal discussions about the fate of the CIA videotapes of interrogations of high-level detainees, none of the relevant actors in the White House, the CIA, or the Department of Justice ever thought to issue such an order. In open, public hearings, each of those officials should be asked a simple question: Why not? Posted
by Marty Lederman [link]
Because if we had issued such an order, Congress would have asked us (a) why had we issued such an order and (b) why hadn't we issued the order earlier.
BTW, has anyone in Congress (a) previously asked us to issue such an order or (b) issued an order to preserve congressional documents relating to the same subjects? Just wondering.
From that Scotusblog government motion, Appendix C from Mikey Hayden at the CIA wrote:
"4. In light of recent events surrounding the destruction of recordings of the interrogations of detainees formerly in the custody of the CIA, I have issued an order to all CIA personnel to preserve and maintain all documents, informaLion, and evidence relating to:
A. any detainee held at the united States Nava! Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; and
B. any detainee held by the CIA"
What struck me is the limiting language that was used.
For example, if you are a detainee and have been “renditioned” to be held by some of the US’s “friends” in the GWOT, such as Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, etc. AND the CIA has information regarding your detention in said “friendly hands”, the CIA does not oblige itself to maintain such information.
CIA-held information like video of interrogations performed by “friends”.
“Sorry, but like Netflix, we just rented this interrogation video and we have to return it or pay a late fee. Can’t have that with US living on a budget and all.”