From: | psychospy@aol.com (PsychoSpy) |
Title: | GROOM LAKE SUIT BOUNCED |
Source: | Las Vegas Review-Journal |
Date: | March 07, 1996 |
workers at a classified Air Force facility.
Publication: Las Vegas Review-Journal
Date: March 7, 1996
Page: 1 (2 pages)
Author: Warren Bates
A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit brought by former workers
at the Air Force operating location near Groom Lake, allowing the
government to keep from disclosing any information on the
classified base.
Ruling that a trial "risks significant harm to national security,"
U.S. District Judge Philip Pro on Wednesday dismissed the suit,
which alleged the military committed and concealed environmental
crimes at the Lincoln County base.
Workers' attorney Jonathan Turley said an appeal to the 9th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco would be filed as soon
as possible. In the meantime, he will ask Pro to reconsider his
decision.
"This is simply the end of the first stage of litigation," said
Turley, a George Washington University law professor. "From the
very beginning of this case we anticipated an appellate fight over
these questions."
The workers contend they contracted illnesses and injuries as a
result of open pit burning of hazardous waste at the base, located
35 miles west of Alamo. Turley argued the waste disposal
procedures violated the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
Perhaps the biggest blows to the lawsuit occurred last year when
the government declared any release of information a threat to
national security.
In February 1995, Air Force Secretary Sheila Widnall invoked the
military and states secret privilege, citing the potential for
"exceptionally grave" consequences to national security. When the
workers challenged that decision, President Clinton in September
signed an exemption allowing the secrecy to continue.
Because no information on the base is currently available to the
workers, Pro ruled, no controversy can be shown and a lawsuit
cannot be brought.
When properly invoked, the privilege is absolute," 23-page
decision said.
It continued: "If mere allegations of criminal conduct were
sufficient to overcome the privilege, the privilege would be
eliminated."
Turley said he was not surprised at the outcome "given the court's
prior rulings," saying the workers' claims would be appealed to
the highest level possible.
"We have argued that the executive branch's authority cannot
extend to the concealment of its own criminal conduct. We are
confident that we will prevail on these questions because the
Supreme Court has been clear that the executive branch powers are
limited in this regard."
Turley pointed toward some aspects of the lawsuit he regarded as
victories.
"These workers have already successfully litigated the first case
against a black facility in history. Previously they were told
they could not retain a lawyer and file a federal action," he
said. "The government was unable to dismiss this lawsuit during
discovery and was forced to perform an inspection and inventory on
the facility and, against its will, it was forced to get a
presidential exemption."
Turley also said that the government finally admitted the facility
had to comply with federal law regarding inspections and that it
had failed to do so in previous years.
In April, federal environmental investigators for the first time
inspected the facility, but the results of that inspection are
confidential.
"Effectively these changes will make it impossible for the
government to argue in future cases that it can create a place
that does not legally exist," Turley said.
The government, he said, struggled to dismiss all the counts in an
effort to avoid a record "while we struggled to preserve a
record." Pro's decision, he said, has ramification's only for
Nevada while a reversal on appeal would have national
ramifications."
The lawsuit was one of two brought by the workers. Pro dismissed
another complaint in January.