This same pattern can be seen in one federal agency
after another. As Joseph McCormick, the former Army
Ranger trying to learn more about the pipeline
planned for Virginia's Shenandoah Valley,
learned, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
now restricts even the most basic information about
such projects. The agency says its approach is
"balanced," adding that security concerns
amply justify the changes.
advertisement
The Bush
administration is pressing the courts to impose more
secrecy, too. Jeffrey Sterling, 36, a former CIA
operations officer, can testify to that. Sterling,
who is black, is suing the CIA for discrimination.
In September, with his attorneys in the midst of
preparing important filings, a CIA security officer
paid them a visit, demanding return of documents the
agency had previously provided. A mistake had been
made, the officer explained, and the records
contained information that if disclosed would
gravely damage national security. The officer warned
that failure to comply could lead to prison or loss
of a security clearance, according to the lawyers.
Although vital to Sterling's case, the lawyers
reluctantly gave up the records.
What was so
important? In a federal courtroom in Alexandria,
Va., a Justice Department attorney recently
explained that the records included a pseudonym
given to Sterling for an internal CIA proceeding on
his discrimination complaint. In fact, the
pseudonym, which Sterling never used in an
operation, had already been disclosed through a
clerical error. Mark Zaid, one of Sterling's
attorneys, says the pseudonym is just a misdirection
play by the CIA. The real reason the agency demanded
the files back, he says, is that they included
information supporting Sterling's
discrimination complaint. Zaid says he has never
encountered such heavy-handed treatment from the
CIA. "When they have an administration that is
willing to cater [to secrecy], they go for it,"
he says, "because they know they can get away
with it." A CIA spokesman declined comment.
In this case, which is still pending, the
administration is invoking the "state
secrets" privilege, in which it asserts that a
case can't proceed normally without disclosing
information harmful to national security. The
Justice Department says it can't provide
statistics on how often it invokes the privilege.
But Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University
law professor active in national security matters,
says: "In the past, it was an unusual thing.
The Bush administration is faster on the
trigger."
Surveillance. At the same
time, the government is opening up a related front.
Last spring, the TSA effectively shut down the case
of Mohammed Ali Ahmed, an Indian Muslim and
naturalized citizen. In September 2001, Ahmed and
three of his children were removed from an American
Airlines flight. Last year, Ahmed filed a civil
rights suit against the airline. But TSA head James
Loy intervened, saying that giving Ahmed
information about his family's removal would
compromise airline security. The government, in
other words, was asserting a claim to withhold the
very information Ahmed needed to pursue his case,
says his attorney, Wayne Krause, of the Texas Civil
Rights Project. "You're looking at an
almost unprecedented vehicle to suppress information
that is vital to the public and the people who want
to vindicate their rights," Krause says.
"Veil of Secrecy," a 
