The state secrets privilege is a judicially created evidentiary privilege that allows the gov¿t. to resist court-ordered disclosure of info. during litigation, if there is a reasonable danger that such disclosure would harm the national security of the U.S. The Classified Info. Procedures Act provides pretrial procedures that permit a trial judge to rule on questions of admissibility involving classified info. before introduction of the evidence in open court. Contents of this report: (1) U.S. v. Reynolds: The Seminal Case: Asserting the Privilege; (2) Totten v. U.S.: The Special Case of Nonjusticiable Contracts for Espionage; (3) The Classified Info. Procedures Act and Secret Evidence in Criminal Litigation; and (4) Legislative Modification of the State Secrets Privilege.

The state secrets privilege is a judicially created evidentiary privilege that allows the government to resist court-ordered disclosure of information during litigation, if there is a reasonable danger that such disclosure would harm the national security of the United States. The Supreme Court first described the modern analytical framework of the state secrets privilege in the 1953 case of United States v. Reynolds. In its opinion, the Court laid out a two-step procedure to be used when evaluating a claim of privilege to protect state secrets. First, there must be a formal claim of privilege, lodged by the head of the department which has control over the matter, after actual personal consideration by that officer. Second, a court must independently determine whether the circumstances are appropriate for the claim of privilege, and yet do so without forcing a disclosure of the very thing the privilege is designed to protect. If the privilege is appropriately invoked, it is absolute and the disclosure of the underlying information cannot be compelled by the court. The Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) provides pretrial procedures that permit a trial judge to rule on questions of admissibility involving classified information before introduction of the evidence in ...

When the Air Force refused to provide the documents to the court, the district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on the issue of negligence; the court of appeals subsequently affirmed the district court's ruling.12 The Supreme Court reversed. [...] With respect to the facts at hand, the Court noted that the Secretary of the Air Force had filed a formal assertion of the privilege, and that there was a reasonable danger "that the accident investigation report would contain references to the secret electronic equipment which was the primary concern of the mission." Id. [...] In Reynolds, the Court noted that the necessity of the underlying information to the litigation will determine "how far the court should probe in satisfying itself that the occasion for invoking the privilege is appropriate."22 In the case of Reynolds, the Court noted that the Air Force had offered to make the surviving crew members available for examination by the plaintiffs.23 Because of this al [...] Therefore, because "the very subject matter of [the] action is a state secret,"35 the court was required to dismiss the suit upon the successful invocation of the privilege by the government.36 In contrast, the Ninth Circuit held that the state secrets privilege only excluded privileged evidence from discovery or admission at trial, and did not require the dismissal of the complaint at the pleadin [...] This rule was first enunciated in Totten v. United States, in which the Supreme Court dismissed a breach of contract claim brought against the government by the estate of a former Civil War spy for the Union.39 The Court dismissed the claim noting that "public policy forbids the maintenance of any suit in a court of justice, the trial of which would inevitably lead to the disclosure of matters whi.

The State Secrets Privilege is an evidentiary rule created by United States legal precedent. The court is asked to exclude evidence from a legal case based solely on an affidavit submitted by the government stating court proceedings might disclose sensitive information which might endanger national security and military secrets in particular as in the case of United States v. Reynolds, the first case that saw formal recognition of the privilege.

As courts adjudicate cases involving classified information, they must protect government secrets. The Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) provides procedures for protecting classified information in criminal prosecutions. Similar procedures are used in civil cases. The courts are assisted in their protection of government secrets by classified information security officers provided by a small office in the Department of Justice's Management Division called the Litigation Security Group.

A criminal prosecution involving CI may cause tension between the government¿s interest in protecting CI and the criminal defendant¿s right to a constitutionally valid trial. In some cases, a defendant may threaten to disclose CI in an effort to gain leverage. Concerns about this practice, referred to as ¿graymail,¿ led Congress to enact the Classified Info. Procedures Act (CIPA) to provide uniform procedures for prosecutions involving CI. Contents of this report: Background; The CIPA: Pretrial Conferences, Required Notice, and Appeals; Protective Orders and Security Clearances; Discovery: Brady and Jencks Material; Depositions; Admissibility of CI: Substitutions; Confrontation Clause and the Silent Witness Rule. A print on demand report.