Civil Rights for People; Economic and Privacy Rights Only for Corporations

The Court of Appeals decision overturning the odious, hate-ridden and let us never forget freakazoid-driven Proposition 8 declaring LGBT Americans to be subhuman is deeply satisfying for many reasons.

But my favorite reason today is because it led to this declaration by Conservative Icon and Victorious Defender of Marriage Equality Ted Olson, ladies and gentleman, who is obviously neither republican nor conservative, no matter what he claims.

Marriage is a conservative value, not conservatives own it or liberals own it -- but the loving relationship between individuals that want to be respected by their society and treated as equals is a conservative value. It involves liberty and privacy and association and identity. Marriage is a building block of our society. Young people get it. Older people are still getting it.

But all of the polls are changing. People more and more are understanding that these are our American citizens, these are our brothers and our sisters, and we have got to treat them right, we have got to treat them decently, and we have got to give them the same freedom and justice that we give to other people. More and more people in America are understanding that. I`m pleased to say more and more Republicans are understanding that.

I`m sad to say -- it makes me sad to say that Republicans haven`t fully understood it. But I think the day will come, and every time that we have a chance, David Boies and I have a chance to address this question, we believe we`re converting more people and persuading more people that this is the right thing.

It not a conservative or liberal issue, or Republican or Democrats, when David Boies and I came together on this, our mission was to persuade the American people that this is an issue of American justice, American freedom, American equality. These are the principles all men are created equal in this country. We have got to get there.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

And if anyone tries to dismiss this victory by claiming it doesn't count because the Ninth Circuit is oh-so-fucking-liberal, this case from December proves that the Ninth Circuit is not by any stretch of the imagination liberal. David Dayen at Firedoglake:

A federal court has upheld on appeal a ruling that telecom companies can receive legal immunity from Congress for participating in the warrantless wiretapping program under George W. Bush.

A U.S. appeals panel ... upheld the constitutionality of a federal law that grants immunity to telecommunications companies that assist the U.S. government in conducting surveillance of American citizens.

Several lawsuits filed in the wake of revelations about warrantless wiretapping alleged that telecom companies provided authorities with direct access to nearly all communications passing through their domestic facilities.

Defendants included AT&T, Sprint Nextel and Verizon Communications Inc.

This came out of a three-judge panel on the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. They protected the telecoms from claims, not the government, so there’s theoretically an avenue to go after the constitutionality of the immunity law that wat. But the government has consistently frustrated lawsuits to that end by declaring everything protected under the state secrets privilege, and courts have generally given wide latitude on those declarations.

However, the Ninth Circuit did allow one case to advance today, ignoring the secrecy claims:

In a separate ruling, the 9th Circuit on Thursday allowed a separate case against the government to proceed, in which plaintiffs allege a communications dragnet of ordinary citizens.

That lawsuit claims the National Security Agency diverted Internet traffic into secure rooms in AT&T facilities across the country. The proposed class action alleges “an unprecedented suspicionless general search” throughout the communications network.

The 9th Circuit reversed a lower court and ruled that the plaintiffs have legal standing to pursue the case.

I’ll wait for bmaz’ analysis, but this could actually get us somewhere on the broader constitutional questions over wiretapping without a warrant. On the subject of the telecoms getting off scot-free, however, we appear to have reached a dead end.

UPDATE: And right on cue, here’s the scoop from Emptywheel. The summation:

In short, the 9th Circuit just said to the government that it could have one–telecom immunity–or another–immunity from citizens’ efforts for redress for illegal surveillance, but it can’t have both. The Executive doesn’t get to pick and choose when it wants to bow to the authority of Congress’ Article I powers.

And with these two decisions by the same Court of Appeals we take another giant step into Separate and Unequal Justice: civil rights (but not civil liberties) for people, but economic and privacy rights only for corporations.