The holding in the opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, available here, is not quite so broad as the above exchange suggests, but it is pretty awesome. In part:
In resisting disclosure of the OLC-DOD Memorandum, the Government contends that making public the legal reasoning in the document will inhibit agencies throughout the Government from seeking OLC’s legal advice. The argument proves too much. If this contention were upheld, waiver of privileges protecting legal advice could never occur. In La Raza, we explained that “[l]ike the deliberative process privilege, the attorney-client privilege may not be invoked to protect a document adopted as, or incorporated by reference into, an agency’s policy.” 411 F.3d at 360. Here, the Government has done so by publicly asserting that OLC advice “establishes the legal boundaries within which we can operate”; it cannot invoke that relied-upon authority and then shield it from public view.” Brennan Center, 697 F.3d at 207-08. Agencies seeking OLC legal advice are surely sophisticated enough to know that in these circumstances attorney/client and deliberative process privileges can be waived and the advice publicly disclosed. We need not fear that OLC will lack for clients.
The opinion in whole has several notable features -- not least of which are the temporary redactions -- and rewards a close reading. Before we read the subject legal justification there is likely to be an appeal, and, as usual, a protracted wait for the subject document to be redacted.
Another toothsome tidbit, quoting an April 2012 address by then-Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, John O. Brennan, is this paradoxical assertion:
[I]n full accordance with the law, and in order to prevent terrorist attacks on the United States and to save American lives, the United States Government conducts drone strikes against specific al-Qaida terrorists, sometimes using remotely piloted aircraft, often referred to publicly as drones.Which begs the question: how does the U.S. Government conduct drone strikes the rest of the time?
Democracy Now! coverage of the ruling, and interview with appellant ACLU's Hina Shamsi, is here.