F.U. right wingers. NSA eavesdropping program ruled unconstitutional

[Dinner]

Let's face it. This isn't a surprise to anyone who has ever read the constitution, however, the far right (like the current Administration, the people at Fox News, and the right wing hate radio shows) have never read the constitution and would just as soon use it for toilet paper. Good call by the courts.

NSA eavesdropping program ruled unconstitutional
Judge orders immediate halt to program

Thursday, August 17, 2006; Posted: 12:14 p.m. EDT (16:14 GMT)

DETROIT, Michigan (AP) -- A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs. They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, which involves secretly taping conversations between people in the U.S. and people in other countries.

The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.

The ACLU said the state-secrets argument was irrelevant because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/17/domesticspying.lawsuit.ap/index.html

[Dinner]

Oh, boohoo. Bush claims he it is well within his persidential authority but said proving it would require revealing state secrets. Where have we heard that one before? Hmmm, maybe it was that Bush could prove Saddam had WMD and planned to give them to terrorists but that we'd just have to trust him... since, you know... It would reveal state secrets if he actually showed us his "proof".

[Japher]

I like the title of this thread better.

[reismark]

I wonder how long it will take for the Junta to cry out against "liberal activist judges" like Taylor who are actually, you know, enforcing the law of the land as it is written.

[Japher]

Junta is a good word
and a great Phish album

[Geronimo]

Re: F.U. right wingers. NSA eavesdropping program ruled unconstitutional

Originally posted by Oerdin
Let's face it. This isn't a surprise to anyone who has ever read the constitution, however, the far right (like the current Administration, the people at Fox News, and the right wing hate radio shows) have never read the constitution and would just as soon use it for toilet paper. Good call by the courts.



http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/....ap/index.html

I think it would be helpful to quote the relevant bits of the constitution. I seem to remember some ambiguity on wire tapping in it.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Round 1 goes as expected.

This fight doesn't end until it goes before the supremes and at that point the session will likely be closed as the government will release operational details.

[Lord Avalon]

Re: Re: F.U. right wingers. NSA eavesdropping program ruled unconstitutional

Originally posted by Geronimo

I think it would be helpful to quote the relevant bits of the constitution. I seem to remember some ambiguity on wire tapping in it.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/...uit/index.html (Page has link to complete ruling.)

Article excerpt:

She further declared that the program "violates the separation of powers doctrine, the Administrative Procedures Act, the First and Fourth amendments to the United States Constitution, the FISA and Title III."

She went on to say that "The president of the United States ... has undisputedly violated the Fourth in failing to procure judicial orders."

First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Violation of freedom of speech.

Fourth Amendment
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.

Warrantless wiretap is unreasonable search.

[Berzerker]

I think it would be helpful to quote the relevant bits of the constitution. I seem to remember some ambiguity on wire tapping in it.

No unreasonable searches or seizures and no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause - 4th amendment. Had wiretaps existed then, the King would have used them and the colonists would have been pissed off. So given the technology of the day, the King was limited to his boys stopping people for little or no reason, rifling thru papers, spying, eavesdropping, etc.

On the other hand, a congressional declaration of war means the Prez becomes CinC and with the job comes additional powers. I'll be surprised if the SCOTUS upholds this judge's decision, wartime always raises issues dealing with the conflict between these additional executive powers and our freedom.

[DinoDoc]

I don't understand the basis for the 1st amendment claim.

[techumseh]

So, as I understand it, your President is required to uphold the constitution. What happens if he is found to have violated it?

[Arrian]

and a great Phish album

Phish
Bush

-Arrian

[Lord Avalon]

Originally posted by techumseh
So, as I understand it, your President is required to uphold the constitution.

Yes, there is even an oath to that effect.

What happens if he is found to have violated it?

I think that would be an impeachable offense. Of course the House of Representatives, currently with a Republican majority, votes to impeach. (The cynic in me says that won't happen.) Then the Senate holds the trial.

Of course in wartime things are different. But did Congress ever actually declare war? And I look askance at the prez declaring a neverending war on terrorism and claiming more powers because it's wartime.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Japher
Junta is a good word
and a great Phish album

Junta

Phish

JM

[DanS]

Eventually, this is going to be in front of the Supreme Court, where operational details will be given. This is just one federal judge. I don't know as they will have to stop to eavesdropping in the meantime.

Originally posted by techumseh
So, as I understand it, your President is required to uphold the constitution. What happens if he is found to have violated it?

Nothing.