Current Events Watch

So the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday rejected the challenge brought against Bush’s illegal domestic wiretapping and electronic surveillance program. Of course, the majority ruling was from Republican-appointed judges. What happened to the law? The constitution? Particularly the 4th amendment?

What strikes me most is that constitutionality aside, the law was completely ignored. In 2002 Bush authorized the National Security Administration to secretly conduct wiretaps without a court order.

What?

Yes, the provision violates the constitution. Clearly. The 4th amendement reads:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

This administration doesn’t particularly seem to care about the constitution anyway, in my opinion. But the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 is very clear about the legality of wiretapping and other electronic spying, and when it is acceptable, and the procedures required to do so. It’s the law, but was completely ignored. And we didn’t find out it had been going on until 2005… they knew it was illegal from the time the NSA was given the authority in 2002, or there would have been no reason to try to keep the program secret.

And what would have been the problem with following the law and getting a warrant with judicial authorization as required by FISA in the first place?

Claiming it’s a “time of war” and other rhetoric is no excuse. And again, 4th amendment violation aside, they really can’t even spin their excuses based on FISA’s Authorization During Time of War clause which allows electronic surveillance without a court order. Firstly, it only allows the president to authorize surveillance without a court order for a period of no more than 15 days after declaration of war. This has been going on for years, without a court order or attempt to receive one. Secondly, Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution specifically says that Congress shall have the power to declare war. Congress has not declared this war.

So where’s the Catch-22 in this attempt to challenge the surveillance program in court? The court said the plaintiffs had no proof that they had been monitored by the government. On the other hand, the National Security Agency refused to turn over any wiretapping information which would have proven the charges one way or the other. The suit wasn’t really about personal wiretapping in the first place, I don’t believe, but an attempt to take the opportunity to ultimately put an end to the entire warrantless surveillance program. But without NSA providing the information required in this particular case, who would know either way who has or has not been tapped? Seems odd and suspicious to me, if they have nothing to hide.

The ACLU brought the lawsuit, backed by and on behalf of scholars, journalists and lawyers who assert that government monitoring has prevented them from doing their jobs properly.

Not that it would probably matter whether or not the NSA turned over the records, what with the Republican-appointed judges making the final decision anyway.

wiretapping, electronic surveillance, government surveillance, government wiretapping