changed the game somewhat. A 3-judge panel, including the Chief Judge of that court, published their decision that 'state secrets' cannot be invoked to prevent trial.

They also wrote that, although a document or a program can be sequestered, that the court makes the decision - not the administration. In other words judges have to be able to read the document or understand the program in order to confirm the necessity of secrecy.

It doesn't rule against torture per se, but it prevents the use of 'state secrets' doctrine to prevent an attempt at redress. It'll be interesting to see whether their ruling is appealed by the current administration.

paul spencer