Catch 22

It's time for an edition of "Catch 22", Republican court style. The 6th court of appeals today reversed a ruling against Bush's domestic spying program. Why? .......

The ruled that the ACLU had no "standing". Standing means that the court didn't think the ACLU was appropriate to sue. But catch this. The reason they felt they had no standing, even though the ACLU was suing on behalf of journalists lawyers and scholars with international contacts, the court ruled that they couldn't prove they'd been spied on.

There you have it. You have to prove that Bush actually spied on you before you can prove that the secret spying program is illegal. Here's how Steve Benen put it:

To grossly oversimplify:

Bush regime: "We're going to secretly surveil all green people without a warrant, because we don't need no steenkin' court system."

The ACLU says: "Fine! That gives Kermit the Frog, here, standing to sue to get his Fourth Amendment rights back!"

Bush regime: "Oh, no you don't! Kermit may be green, but he still has to personally prove he was sued!"

The ACLU: "It's a secret program! Kermit can't do that!"

Bush regime: "And your point is?"

Onward to the Supreme Conservative Tribunal Court where I'm sure the issue will be heard and fairly judged.