debgeisler said it better than I could in this post, reporting that the US Supreme Court had refused to take up the case of Gilmore v. Gonzalez, thereby affirming that the US can and does have "secret laws" that we as citizens are not allowed to read and therefore are unable to either determine whether we are in compliance of them or defend ourselves from accusations of having broken them. This further gives law enforcement authorities the open door to claim anything they want, since they don't have to produce proof. Remember me talking about railroad enthusiasts being hassled for taking pictures of trains from public property? Expect to see more of that sort of thing, since the authorities merely have to claim that there is a law, particularly if they can claim some justification under anti-terrorist legislation.
I wonder if there's any chance I can get the ear of my congressman the next time he holds a public meeting. After all, even if I as a citizen am now denied access to the laws of my country, there may be a chance that he, as one of the people who are theoretically voting on those laws, might have a chance to read them. Although I don't know. There do seem to be people who think that the President makes laws -- I've heard people say, "The President should make a law ... " followed by whatever it is they want the law to do. And our current President seems very willing to ignore laws and do whatever it is he wants to do, like open our mail at his discretion.
I keep telling myself that he's only got two more years left in his term. The question is whether he'll go quietly or not.