Law School Discussion

.

.
« on: December 20, 2005, 05:19:07 AM »
:)

be10dwn

Re: What are your thoughts on Government Wiretaps?
« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2005, 06:27:28 AM »
Im afraid to say...I think my computer is tapped...

redemption

Re: What are your thoughts on Government Wiretaps?
« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2005, 06:55:19 AM »

It's not the wiretaps, but the fact that they broke the law and went around FISA when the FISA court has in previous administrations, after hearing the basis for the application in camera and ex parte mind you, approved 10,000 wiretaps and denied only ten. The executive branch has only ever appealed one of those denials to the FISA appeals court. The FISA court has never leaked. If the FISA appeals court denies their wiretap application, they can immediately (repeat, immediately) appeal to and be heard by the Supreme Court - in camera again, ex parte again. And all of this can be done retroactively - you can wiretap today and apply for the warrant to do so tomorrow or the day after.

That they chose to do none of these things, is a brazen challenge to the other branches of government. Shame on those members of congress (mostly lawyers, btw) who were briefed and did nothing. When you break the law, when everyone knows that you broke the law, you should be prosecuted. If this is not an impeachment matter, then what is?

Freak

  • ****
  • 4767
  • What's your agenda?!
    • View Profile
Re: What are your thoughts on Government Wiretaps?
« Reply #3 on: December 20, 2005, 12:39:03 PM »
Frankly I strongly disagree with anybody acting "outside the old law" (p.2) Is it law or not? What does being old have to do with anything? They imply the law has changed, but if it hasn't labeling it old because you can't really use overruled is just propaganda.

However, if they are only monitoring international calls, the violation isn't nearly as heinous. Still they are legally bound to utilize the FISA court.

At least Lincoln had a better reason for suspending Habeas Corpus. The important thing is that nothing illegal is justified judicially. That would set a precedent, which we don't need.

Since I had so much fun on this thread I've decided to give a running commentary on what's occured in red in my posts. For starters I'm probably wrong in saying anybody is bound by FISA as I understand the War Powers Act, now

chidochido

  • ****
  • 1138
  • Rebuilding
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: What are your thoughts on Government Wiretaps?
« Reply #4 on: December 20, 2005, 01:13:01 PM »
This is some shady sh!t! I can't wait to see what's next in our addendum to Orwell's 1984...

Re: What are your thoughts on Government Wiretaps?
« Reply #5 on: December 20, 2005, 01:32:34 PM »

It's not the wiretaps, but the fact that they broke the law and went around FISA when the FISA court has in previous administrations, after hearing the basis for the application in camera and ex parte mind you, approved 10,000 wiretaps and denied only ten. The executive branch has only ever appealed one of those denials to the FISA appeals court. The FISA court has never leaked. If the FISA appeals court denies their wiretap application, they can immediately (repeat, immediately) appeal to and be heard by the Supreme Court - in camera again, ex parte again. And all of this can be done retroactively - you can wiretap today and apply for the warrant to do so tomorrow or the day after.

That they chose to do none of these things, is a brazen challenge to the other branches of government. Shame on those members of congress (mostly lawyers, btw) who were briefed and did nothing. When you break the law, when everyone knows that you broke the law, you should be prosecuted. If this is not an impeachment matter, then what is?

it's not just FISA...it's the freaking 4th Amendment to the Constitution...you know, that think presidents swear to uphold and all.

"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."

Good explanation can be found here: http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/12/its-constitution-stupid.html

Freak

  • ****
  • 4767
  • What's your agenda?!
    • View Profile
Re: What are your thoughts on Government Wiretaps?
« Reply #6 on: December 20, 2005, 01:39:35 PM »
The 4th doesn't exaclty cover wiretapping, but I believe it's been decided that it does cover wiretapping. I should look up the case law, but I'm a bit lazy, finals are over so no more law for a week or so! heh

Here I'm sending a challenge to other posters to do some homework as I've noticed that the extent of research they do is to cite news articles. I find this disturbing and frankly I was tired of doing most of the research in debates only to have it ignored.

Julie Fern

  • *****
  • 25797
  • hillary clinton say "boo!"
    • View Profile
Re: What are your thoughts on Government Wiretaps?
« Reply #7 on: December 20, 2005, 01:53:57 PM »
not according to supreme court.

Freak

  • ****
  • 4767
  • What's your agenda?!
    • View Profile
Re: What are your thoughts on Government Wiretaps?
« Reply #8 on: December 20, 2005, 01:57:46 PM »
Ah! Nice of you to do my HW. So the SC doesn't include wiretapping in the 4th Amend.? That's not cool. Do you happen to know the case?

Thanks.

Here I reiterate my challege.

Re: What are your thoughts on Government Wiretaps?
« Reply #9 on: December 20, 2005, 02:14:41 PM »
I'm pretty sure it does...one of the points of FISA was to create an expedited way of rubberstamping 'probable cause' for wiretapping, right?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-legal18dec18,1,966036.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

Bush said his decision was "fully consistent with my constitutional responsibilities and authorities." And the president's lawyers have maintained that the commander in chief has the "inherent" authority to act in the interest of national security, even if he overrides the law.

But the Supreme Court did not accept that claim when it was tested in the past.

In 1972, the justices unanimously rejected President Nixon's contention that he had the power to order wiretapping without a warrant to protect national security. The decision came in the case of three men who had allegedly plotted to bomb a CIA facility in Michigan. After the ruling, charges in the case were dismissed.

The 4th Amendment protects Americans from "unreasonable searches and seizures" by the government, said then-Justice Lewis F. Powell, a Nixon appointee, delivering the court's ruling, and such freedoms "cannot be properly guaranteed if domestic security surveillances are conducted solely within the discretion of the executive branch."

He said Nixon's lawyer should have obtained a search warrant from a judge before the government tapped the telephones of the alleged plotters.

"We recognize, as we have before, the constitutional basis of the president's domestic security role, but we think it must be exercised in a manner compatible with the 4th Amendment," Powell said.

But in the decision, Powell said the court was not ruling on the "president's surveillance power with respect to the activities of foreign powers, within or without this country."


FISA's supposed to take care of the last part...