Hacker News Reader

The interpretation of the Law rests on judicial opinions. Many of those decisions are indeed secret, rendering the interpretation of the law itself secret. I think it's reasonable to say that this makes the laws 'secret', since it is impossible to know whether you are in violation without knowing the interpretation.

Source: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/government-says-secret...

The laws the FISA court uses to authorize surveillance are not secret.

Well, so far as we know anyway. There is still, AFAIK, an open question about the existence and/or exact nature of "secret laws" in the US. See John Gilmore's struggle to travel without offering up identity documents[1], for example.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilmore_v._Gonzales

But isn't the interpretation of those laws as used by the courts and the DoJ a secret?

In that ever court case involves a judge interpreting the law, and none of the FISA cases will ever be public because they involve confidential targets, informants, sources, and methods of intelligence gathering, yes.

But the prevailing view seems to be that the whole FISA program is a system of secret laws, which is not in fact the truth.

Case law? Precedent?