Should the government be allowed to lie to the courts in the name of national security? This is the question that judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will have to consider in the next few weeks.
On Monday, the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California (ACLU SoCal) asked the full Ninth Circuit to rehear a case in which the government repeatedly lied to a federal district judge about the existence of FBI surveillance documents.
If the judges of the Ninth Circuit fail to act, there will be grave repercussions for government transparency. Federal courts provide a check on the government's abuse of power -- a check that is more critical now than ever before, as individual judges decide so many fundamental questions about our rights in private, with nothing but the government's assurances to guide them. Allowing the government to lie to these very same courts -- knowing that there will be no punishment if they are caught -- puts the integrity of our judicial system at risk.
ACLU SoCal filed the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case Islamic Shura Council v. FBI on behalf of several prominent, law-abiding Muslim community leaders and organizations who wanted to uncover information about the FBI's surveillance of them. The FOIA is a law Congress passed that gives courts the authority to order the government to turn over information to the public.
While the government disclosed some documents -- which revealed, among other things, that the FBI has spied extensively on the peaceful activities of Muslim community organizations, including their participation in immigration reform rallies -- it also lied to the court about the number and content of the documents it had kept secret. Only when U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney discovered the lies did the government reveal the whole truth and defend its actions, claiming that it had to mislead the court because even acknowledging the existence of the documents would have posed a threat to national security.
Courts have the power to impose sanctions for lies, and Judge Carney did so, fining the government for deceiving him. But the government appealed to the Ninth Circuit, and in July a three-judge panel ruled that the government could not be sanctioned. Why? The panel found that the government eventually "corrected" its lies -- even though it did so onlyafter the judge uncovered the lies and ordered a full explanation.
The full court could -- and should -- rehear this case. The power of federal judges to review the conduct of the executive branch, both in FOIA cases and in others, hangs in the balance.
Ahilan Arulanantham is Deputy Legal Director at the ACLU of Southern California. Reposted from Huffington Post

If you’re a woman — or if you’re simply an individual who supports reproductive rights and sexual health — the Golden State may be the place for you. In recent weeks, California lawmakers have rushed to approve several pieces of legislation that make the state a standout leader in women’s health issues. Here are five reasons you may want to consider moving there:

ACT NOW: Sign our petition urging Gov. Brown to expand women's access to abortion

1. California wants to expand the pool of abortion providers. At the end of last month, the California legislature bucked the national trend and voted to actually expand abortion access instead of limiting it. Under this measure, which is awaiting Gov. Jerry Brown’s (D) signature, a wider pool of medical professionals will be legally permitted to perform abortions. Allowing nurse practitioners and trained physicians assistants to provide this care will help address the fact that over half of the counties in the state don’t have an abortion provider. Advocates say it’s an important method of ensuring that women will be able to have early abortions, and won’t be forced to delay the procedure until they can travel to get to the nearest doctor.
2. California is working to protect abortion clinics. In addition to allowing a greater number of medical professionals to provide abortion care, California is also working to protect reproductive access in another way. Instead of launching politicized attacks against abortion clinics — a widespread strategy that is forcing dozens of clinics across the country to close — the state is advancing a measure that would make sure clinics aren’t held to unnecessary standards. “This bill will repeal unequal and burdensome building requirements on clinics that provide abortions,” the legislation’s sponsor explained. It’s been approved by the Senate, and awaits a final vote in the California Assembly.

ACT NOW: Sign the petition urging Gov. Brown to protect dependents' patient privacy.

3. California may ensure young adults won’t worry about anyone finding out they got STD tested or had an abortion. This week, California lawmakers approved the Confidential Health Information Act — a measure that will make sure residents don’t have to disclose any “sensitive” health services they’ve received through their insurance. This is important because, when people are under a spouse’s or a parent’s insurance policy, they typically run the risk of that person seeing an itemized list of every type of health service they used the insurance for. Now that Obamacare allows young adults to stay on their parents’ plans until the age of 26, that poses a problem for many young people who aren’t comfortable telling their parents about the sexual health care they’ve received. Many women end up paying for abortions with their own money out of pocket because they’re too worried about this dynamic. If Brown signs this bill, that won’t be an issue in the Golden State anymore.
4. California is taking steps to prevent victim-blaming and cyber-bullying. California is considering a bill that would outlaw “revenge porn” — that is, sexual photos of an individual that are posted online by their angry ex without their consent. Revenge porn is a growing problem and, when it comes to nonconsensual sex, spreading around graphic photos of rape victims has led some of them to commit suicide. “It’s absolutely just a new form of victim-blaming,” the founder of the group “End Revenge Porn”explains. New Jersey is the only other state in the country that currently criminalizes this type of online behavior, so California’s bill — which was recently approved by the Senate — could help pave the way for similar legislation in other places.
5. California just expanded the definition of rape to ensure victims will have justice. On Monday, California finally closed a loophole in a century-old law that didn’t include non-married people in a certain legal definition of rape. Under the old statute, if a woman’s rapist impersonated her boyfriend and forced himself on her while she was unconscious, he couldn’t technically be convicted of rape — even though he could be if his victim was married and he pretended to be her husband. It’s an arcane law that had been on the books since 1872, and the update was long overdue. Still, though, it’s important for states to work on updating their definitions for sexual assault to encompass all victims’ experiences. Too often, outdated policies impact the way that rape victims are treated for decades.

Aside from reproductive health policies, the Golden State has also recently advanced legislation to extend labor protections to domestic workers, make it easier for low-income people to apply for food stamps, impose additional restrictions on fracking, and ban kits that can convert standard firearms to semi-automatics.
By Tara Culp-Ressler, Re-posted from Think Progress