A federal judge on Thursday dismissed former CIA operative Valerie Plame's lawsuit against members of the Bush administration in the CIA leak scandal.
U.S. District Judge John D. Bates dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds and said he would not express an opinion on the constitutional arguments. Bates dismissed the case against all defendants: Cheney, White House political adviser Karl Rove and former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
UPDATE: TP reports that Judge Bates is the same judge that dismissed the suit over Cheney's energy task force meetings. "Activist judge", anyone?
UPDATE #2: C&Ler JR (one of my legal eagles) just sent this email to me: Although it will ultimately be unsuccessful, why not now demand that Congress pass a law that will give Plame the right to pursue her case in court?
The Republican Congress did essentially the same thing regarding Terry Schiavo, remember? Of course Bush would not sign such a bill it but it will be further evidence for historians to write just how corrupt a president he was/is.
UPDATE #3 Melanie Sloan, of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the Wilsons' legal counsel has issued a statement you can read below the fold.
Washington, DC -- Earlier today, District of Columbia District Court Judge John D. Bates dismissed Joe and Valerie Wilsons' civil suit against Vice President Dick Cheney, presidential aide Karl Rove, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and Richard Armitage. While Judge Bates recognized that the Wilsons' claims "pose important questions relating to the propriety of actions undertaken by our highest government officials," he dismissed their suit on a threshold legal issue: that there is no constitutional remedy available to them.
While the Wilsons' lawyers are reviewing the decision, they anticipate filing an appeal. Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington ("CREW"), one of the Wilsons' lawyers, said today, "While we are obviously very disappointed by today's decision, we have always expected that this case would ultimately be decided by a higher court." Sloan continued, "We disagree with the court's holding and intend to pursue this case vigorously to protect all Americans from vindictive government officials who abuse their power for their own political ends."