Patterico's Pontifications

3/3/2008

Blowback On Unconstitutional Restraining Order Continues

Filed under: Blogging Matters,Civil Liberties,Court Decisions — Justin Levine @ 2:34 pm



[posted by Justin Levine]

A federal judge in California continues to get up to speed on the 21st Century learning curve. He didn’t just reconsider the injunction, he also had second thoughts about the jurisdictional question.

The Plaintiff/bank in question has had its reputation trashed far more because of the lawsuit than because of the leak.

In a statement to the court, Matthews went on to take full aim at Julius Baer. “The crowning irony is that Plaintiffs—who purport to be shocked, shocked that Wikileaks has promised anonymity to leakers—are a Swiss bank and its Cayman Islands subsidiary.”

PC World

In his parting shot on a troubled case Judge White was reported as bemoaning the “definite disconnect between the evolution of our constitutional jurisprudence and modern technology.”

“Maybe that’s just the reality of the world that we live in. When this genie gets out of the bottle, that’s it,” he said.

Personally speaking – music to my ears.

7 Responses to “Blowback On Unconstitutional Restraining Order Continues”

  1. What’s the whole legal scene about “leaking” anyway? All I ever read about is prosecution of people who publish information… but the leaker himself seems to be seldom, if ever, identified or involved.

    Perhaps if companies spent as much effort pursuing the circumstances that lead to such leaks, they would simultaneously improve their track record in guarding OUR confidential information.

    Instead, they spend all the time and effort on pursuing websites and magazines. A classic case of the barn door and the horse.

    Don (dedc03)

  2. Good point Don.

    Justin Levine (20f2b5)

  3. I especially liked the part about bank secrecy. As if banks are the only orginizations that can keep a secret?
    This is when legal dept’s need to have a PR person on-staff to run things like this past; to consider which is most damaging: Action, or Non-action?
    It is very appearant that with this case, they needed to keep their pants zipped; for, they stepped on it big-time.

    Another Drew (f9dd2c)

  4. In places like England and other commonwealth countries that employ prior restraint, it’s easier and more effective to go after the publisher than the leaker. I imagine these banks/entities and their attorneys are more familiar with the laws of those countries, and that may have affected their decisions about how to proceed.

    DRJ (d8934e)

  5. With the possible exception of North Dakota, is there any state with courts that are more harmful to both liberty and law than California?

    Laurence Sheldon (d1f8c6)

  6. Laurence – The Massatootsis Supreme Court telling the legislature what they must pass springs to mind.

    JD (626b4c)

  7. This was not a CA court interpreting CA laws, but a Federal District Court (located in CA) dealing with Federal Law.

    If it was a CA court, they probably would have shut down the Bank (Big Finance – Bad!), and given the assets to the viewers of Wikileaks.

    Another Drew (8018ee)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0719 secs.