Subject: Re: GTMO, Torture, renditions, etc.
From: "Christopher Edley" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], "John Podesta" <[email-masked]>, "Stern, Todd" <[email-masked]>, "Lisa Brown" <[email-masked]>, "Don Gips" <[email-masked]>, "Melody Barnes" <[email-masked]>, "Cassandra Butts" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:14:44 -0800

Thanks susan -- as to whether we should do more, I don't know. Why
don't I put on my board hat, with permission of melody and don, and
poke around a bit as to who from the doj team isinvolved, and their
direction -- and then report back to everyone if I sense any
difficulty?  Let's assume everything is okay until there is contrary
evidence. Thanks

On 11/10/08, [email-masked] <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Thanks, Chris.
>
> Mary De Rosa is doing these issues from nat sec side and is already plugged
> into DOJ team as I understand it.
>
> Is there more we should do, in your view, to ensure appropriate lash-up?
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Christopher Edley" <[email-masked]>
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 14:52:07
> To: John Podesta<[email-masked]>; Susan Rice<[email-masked]>;
> Stern, Todd<[email-masked]>; Lisa Brown<[email-masked]>;
> Don Gips<[email-masked]>; Melody Barnes<[email-masked]>;
> Cassandra Butts<[email-masked]>
> Subject: GTMO, Torture, renditions, etc.
>
>
> Todd et al.,
>
> I'm writing to ask where we stand with respect to working through the
> national securities law and civil liberties law concerning the topics
> above.  I believe we agreed that some cross-talk between the National
> Security team and the DOJ/Domestic team is required, but I don't recall
> getting to closure on which individuals have the lead.
>
> The exchange I had with Susan Rice at the last Board meeting is
> illustrative
> of the difficulty. There can be an inherent tension between the national
> security perspective and the Rule of Law perspective. As we know, this
> played out in the Bush Administration rather tragically, and the vast
> majority of legal observers believe that the DOJ participants acted in a
> manner that -- at a minimum -- violated fundamental ethical and
> professional
> principles, if not the Law.  As a formal matter, whatever course of policy
> and action the Obama Administration adopts on these issues, clearance by
> OLC
> and the Attorney General will be required, as well as review by White House
> Counsel.
>
> So, I believe the Transition should likewise get the right set of
> perspectives around a table sooner rather than later.
>
> There is another, related issue that deserves some attention: The role of
> OLC in relation to the State Department Legal Adviser (L).  The Bush
> Administration broke with precedent by shifting more authority to OLC for
> definitive resolution of questions of international law and treaty
> interpretation.  L was consulted, but the formal lead rested with OLC.
> Earlier administrations allowed the State Department to have the lead.
> What
> will be the practice in the Obama Administration?  There are arguments in
> both directions. It would be good to get this resolved before the
> appointees
> are selected.
>
> I am interested in these issues, having taught National Security Law. But I
> know there are several terrific lawyers who could contribute a lot:  Eric
> Holder, Jamie Gorelick, Larry Tribe, Cass Sunstein, Alex Aleinikoff.
>
>
> --
> (personal email)
> Christopher Edley, Jr.
> Professor and Dean
> UC Berkeley Law School
>
>

-- 
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com

(personal email)
Christopher Edley, Jr.
Professor and Dean
UC Berkeley Law School