Warrantless wiretapping unconstitutional
Just breaking now, a Federal Judge in Detroit struck down the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program as unconstitutional. (I'm assuming on 4th amendment grounds.)
Later: Copy Editor came through with the injuction link (PDF.) The stay was issued as TSP(Terrorist Surveillance Program) violates Separation of Powers, the Administrative Procedures Act, First and Fourt Amendments, FISA, and Tile III.
(TPM has the full decision (PDF.))
And, interestingly, it seems to be another slapdown of the Bush administration's claims of Article II "Commander In Chief" powers similar to Hamdan.
(It's still early, and the lawyer/bloggers haven't really dug in, but for analysis, might I recommend Glenn Greenwald, or Talkleft.
Later: Copy Editor came through with the injuction link (PDF.) The stay was issued as TSP(Terrorist Surveillance Program) violates Separation of Powers, the Administrative Procedures Act, First and Fourt Amendments, FISA, and Tile III.
(TPM has the full decision (PDF.))
And, interestingly, it seems to be another slapdown of the Bush administration's claims of Article II "Commander In Chief" powers similar to Hamdan.
(It's still early, and the lawyer/bloggers haven't really dug in, but for analysis, might I recommend Glenn Greenwald, or Talkleft.
posted by mikevotes at
11:36 AM
11 Comments:
I love the Internet, and .pdfs. Read it for yourself, my friend.
By
Bravo 2-1, at 12:50 PM
Cool. Yeah, I posted this on the first article I saw. There's nothing in the story I linked. It was the very first write.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 1:23 PM
I Australia 'bush lawyers' are considered a danger because they lack any formal training to support their free advice.
In the US 'Bush lawyers' are dangerous because of a seeming ability to twist the law to their beliefs.
Somehow I don't see the courts stopping the Bush law process, it has to be the people who put an end to it.
By
Cartledge, at 1:31 PM
Yeah, but "Bush pilots" fly right? Unlike our president in his National Guard service keeping Texas safe from the Vietcong.
Well, no the courts can do it. The courts are the ultimate arbiter of what is law. This court could be overturned on appeal, but take a look at tghe recent Hamdan decision which has forced the Bush admin to attempt to retroactively rewwrite the war crimes statute.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 1:40 PM
Why do newpapers insist on calling it 'warrantless surveillance'? Please just call it what it is -- spying.
It's domestic spying, and it's no more lawful than theft.
By
Anonymous, at 4:20 PM
You're right, without a warrant, it is. But I think it's an effort to distinguish between warranted FISA-type or court approved, and this claim of regal power.
Plus, I do think that the media are playing this carefully politically. They could call it the "Big Brother program," or Soviet-style eavesdropping as extreme examples.
Also, first comment? Welcome.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 5:40 PM
The Republicans must be frustrated. After appointing hundreds of federal judges (not to mention the Supreme Court appointments that decided against Rumsfeld) They are losing in court, where it matters.
By
Unknown, at 8:39 PM
Damn liberal media in this country!
A federal judge finds that the president of the United States has broken the law and violated the US Constitution and the top story is a 9 year old murder case?!?
WTF!?!?
By
zen, at 9:27 PM
Time. Yeah. The have been complaining it's a democratic judge. Next we'll be hearing it's a Democratic constitution.
As a reminder, Chief Justice Roberts already upheld the claims of executive power in the Hamdan case when he was at appeals.
And, Zen,
Anything but Iraq.
I agree with your outrage.
We've hit a point where viewership is more important than news. Interestingly, when there was just CNN and no competition, we got more news.
Also, as another theory, It just came out a couple of days ago that the original story on the NSA warrantles eavesdropping was delayed through the 2004 election for the same reasons. So....
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 9:41 PM
It's a good day for the republic. One tiny step back from fascism is better than none.
By
Anonymous, at 10:41 PM
I agree wholly, and although this still hasd to go to appeals, I think it's bigger than a tiny step in that it confirms Hamdan.
A set of precedents is building.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 7:19 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home