Senate Proceeding on Jun 10th, 2009 :: 8:51:40 to 8:56:54
Total video length: 9 hours 45 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Views:50 Duration: 0:05:14 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

8:51:40 to 8:52:00( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: between these two great senators. it is an interesting debate. i come down on the fact that if they are moved into any of our facilitiesn this country -- and there are very few that could take them, in fact i don't know of any that could take them

8:51:40 to 8:56:54( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Orrin Hatch

8:52:01 to 8:52:25( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: that aren't overcrowded right now -- there will be the same screaming and shouting because they will not be treated anywhere near as well as they're treated in guantanamo. so no matter what we do, that new day is not going to be a very happy day. and it's far better to have this $200 million facility that has been by international organizations

8:52:28 to 8:52:49( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: as being better than better than average facilities that would be acceptable. it's better to just acknowledge that and keep treating them as decently and as -- with dignity as we can, which is more than they'll get in a supermax facility in this country or any

8:52:50 to 8:53:10( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: other facility. the supermax facilities are loaded with prisoners. they've got more than they can handle now. why would we put them? and why would we put them in this country where they can influence other people who are dissatisfied with life and discontented and have committed very serious crime

8:53:11 to 8:53:32( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: them the recruitment possibilities that they'd have in our it doesn't make sense. why would we spend -- blow $200 million in facilities and then spend another $80 million to shut it down? it seems like it's going a little bit too far because of the attempt of administration to please, you

8:53:33 to 8:53:56( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: know, support terrorists and the rest of the world. admittedly there have been some outstanding people in our country who have just come to the conclusion they should shut guantanamo down. but they did so without havg a real viable alternative to guantanamo. and that's the thing bothers me. and i don't know of any state in

8:53:57 to 8:54:17( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the union wants these peopl within their prison system, assuming theyan handle them. that means a lot more expense, a lot more problems. that means the possibility they will be recruiting terrorists and helping criminals t become terrorists in our country. i can't begin to tell you the co that. be that as it may, the president

8:54:18 to 8:54:39( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: seems to really want to do that in spite of the fact that overwhelmingly the american people don't want him that. well, mr. president, i ask that the remarks i'm about to make be placed at an appropriate place in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: mr. president, i rise today to express my reservations regarding the

8:54:40 to 8:55:00( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: states secrets protection act. since one of the purpose of government is to provide a strong national defense, there are methods and sources that should never be disclosed for fear of irreparable damage to our national security. the judicial branch has a long documented history in addressing the states secrets privilege. through the years courts have

8:55:01 to 8:55:21( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: affirmed time after time, time and again the privilege of the government to withhold information national security programs. the modern origin of this doctrine was established in the united states v. reynolds. the supreme court created the reynolds compromise which stated that the privilege applies when

8:55:22 to 8:55:42( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the -- "from all circumstances of the case that there is a reasonable danger of the -- compulsion of the evidence will matters which in the interest of national security should not be divulged. unquote. got that? as long as there is a reasonable

8:55:43 to 8:56:03( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: danger, according to the supreme court of the united states, the compulsion of the evidence will expose military matters which in the interest of national security should not be divulged. now that is what the supreme court has held and has continued to affirm this position with the executive branch.

8:56:04 to 8:56:25( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: under the reynolds states secrets privilege cannot and has the pending bill before the senate judiciary committee, known as the states srets protection act would negate the reynolds compromise and create a higher standard approved for the government to important privilege. my analysis of the legislation

8:56:26 to 8:56:46( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: before us leads me to conclude that this bill will bring chaos to the balance struck by the reynolds decision. this bill lowers the defence that courts give to the executive branch in its assertion of the states secrets it raises the burden of proof that the government must meet to protect state secrets.

8:56:47 to 8:56:56( Edit History Discussion )

Orrin Hatch: the courts have built great flexibility int the states secrets doctrine to allow themselves the hrat tao