The state secret privilege just begs to be abused by bureaucrats trying to CYA. In fact the very first time it was used, it was quite likely abused! See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Reynolds for more.
Isn't the judicial system a part of the government. Can't it just decide to throw away the lawsuit anyway, even if there was no ready available "secrets" excuse?
I know the lawsuits happen, but in theory how does it work?
But how many cases there have been (and won) accusing the government of torture, bad budget decisions, and others?
There is the Federal Tort Claims act in case a govt employee injures someone. But that is very limited and a jury is not allowed to decide on the case.
I didn't say they always made the right decision, did I? However, the courts don't usually agree with the government because they're part of the government themselves.
But, the government has agreed by prior legislation to be sued in a variety of circumstances (as described in the above article). And, the government is not a monolith acting with one mind and one purpose, so the courts' sense of justice often (ideally, 'always') trumps blind allegiance to other branches of government. (Judges also enjoy procedural protections against meddling by other officeholders.)
Consider: what the government occasionally loses in judgements it may gain many times over in greater legitimacy and consensual cooperation from its citizens/contractors/subdivisions/etc.
> Consider: what the government occasionally loses in judgements it may gain many times over in greater legitimacy and consensual cooperation from its citizens / contractors / subdivisions / etc.
Interesting point. I never thought of it that way. There is apparently the Federal Tort Claims Act. However a jury trial is not allowed.
