The FISA court is concerned about NSA spying
Page A01 of the WaPo, so I'm not gonna excerpt, but the judges on the FISA court are very concerned about the NSA spying. As they are the ultimate arbiters of this sort of thing, this is a pretty significant story.
Among all the interesting bits in this piece, the one that grabbed me is the mention that the FISA court might revisit previously approved taps if the evidence for them was obtained in an illegal way. That would be misrepresenting to the court and that's gotta be illegal.
I'm beginning to think that's the crux of this whole thing, that this illegal spying is an outgrowth of the questionably legal renditions and "harsh interrogation tactics." This has always been ONE of the problems with the Bush administration's claims around detainee practices, that any evidence gathered is totally inadmissible in any court. (See Padilla below.)
Among all the interesting bits in this piece, the one that grabbed me is the mention that the FISA court might revisit previously approved taps if the evidence for them was obtained in an illegal way. That would be misrepresenting to the court and that's gotta be illegal.
I'm beginning to think that's the crux of this whole thing, that this illegal spying is an outgrowth of the questionably legal renditions and "harsh interrogation tactics." This has always been ONE of the problems with the Bush administration's claims around detainee practices, that any evidence gathered is totally inadmissible in any court. (See Padilla below.)
posted by mikevotes at
8:10 AM
2 Comments:
The resignation of a FISA judge is telling. Of more interest to me is where in the chain of court hierarchy does FISA rest? I've searched a bit, and can't find anything that clearly explains the powers, beyond the GRANTING of special warrants and other privelages that FISA holds. It will be interesting to see if FISA acts as a body, as they are seemingly threatening -- almost like a D.A. -- in retroactively determining if warrants were obtained under false pretense, or if actions were improperly taken without warrant. Traditionally, it's not up to the courts to jump in when they see a wrong. Someone has to bring them a case. Anyone just happen to "know" if they've been spied on lately without a warrant? This is a tough one, and without congressional investigation goes nowhere.
By
Anonymous, at 12:28 PM
I don't know their sprecific hieracrchical tree, but the members of the FISA court are appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme court, and I read that there is a FISA appeals court which is much smaller(3 I think.)
And, I would guess that after that it goes to the Supremes, although since it is a oneseided court,goverment lawyers only, that probably wouldn't happen.
And, from the little I've read of the statutes, they are judges from other courts who also serve as FISA judges whose sole role is to look at intel matters. And I don't think that their mandate precludes them from going back and reviewing previous decisions.
BUT, I am not an expert, this is all just based on general impressions. If I've said anything wrong here, somebody please correct me.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 12:59 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home