Slashdot Mirror
Two Groups File Domestic Spying Lawsuits
An anonymous reader writes "The Center for Constitutional Rights and the ACLU both recently filed lawsuits, in New York and Detroit respectively, claiming that President Bush's electronic eavsdropping program is illegal and exceeds his constitutional powers. From the article: 'The Detroit [ACLU] lawsuit, which names the National Security Agency and its director, said the program has impaired plaintiffs' ability to gather information from sources abroad as they try to locate witnesses, represent clients, do research or engage in advocacy.'
I'm no expert on the topic. I was wondering if anyone from Soviet Russia could help us out and let us know whether it was necessary for domestic intelligence agencies to gain a warrant before wiretapping Russian citizens. It just seems like a fun thing to know.
We're a long way from 1776, people.
If you guessed Bush, 2004, and Gonzales, try again: http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/al-gore
I understand being concerned about possible domestic wiretapping, but lets get real. Many people are suddenly outraged only because it is this administration at this time, when it has been going on and has been an issue for many, many years. Clinton/Gore not only used it, but justified it for completely domestic issues as well.
I HAVE CUBIC WISDOM THAT TRANSCENDS AND CONTRADICTS ONE DAY GODS
This lawsuit has some really strange bedfellows.
First you have greenpeace which is afraid that its fellow members in ELF are bein listened in on.
Then you have Council on American-Islamic Relations who has said that terrorist suspects should have unlimited access to thier supporters back home.
There are plenty of worthwhile groups that looking into wiretapping and if it was legal, this lawsuit is not going to do anything. The only reason for the ACLU to do it is for the publicity; after all it is coming up to 1 year when they filed a suit saying that the US Government has no right to pick up and deport illegal aliens.
As for the latest talking point about physical searches during the Clinton administration, remember that was before FISA required warrants for physical searches. That provision was not inserted until the PATRIOT Act. I'm not saying Clinton was entirely without fault, but attempting to smear him certainly does not clear Bush.
If you think that there are only around 36 phone calls that were tapped you're seriously deluded. We're talking around 500 "individuals" monitored per day. Even if each of those persons only made one phone call that's more than 500,000 calls that have been monitored. Stop drinking the kool aid and start thinking for yourself. This administration is destroying this country. Don't help them do it.
There was Cowboy Neal at the wheel of a bus to never-ever land.
Unless, of course, you're talking about the right to own a gun.
The NRA has something like 10x the operating budget of the ACLU. So even if the ALCU's position on the issue was "liberal" (supporting gun rights above and beyond the literal wording of the constitution), the 2nd Amendment wouldn't be smart place to spend their resources. I covered all bases by joining both organizations.
On some issues, such as the First Amendment ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."), they argue and stretch the meaning beyond the clear wording (i.e. States are not "Congress," so the prohibition does not apply to State establishment of religion, although most states have similar Constitutional prohibitions).
actually, the prohibition does apply to the states, thanks to the 14th amendment.
In other matters, such as the Second Amendment, they argue against civil liberties in opposition to the clear wording and intent ("..the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."), by arguing it somehow doesn't recognize an individual right.
which is consistent with decades of SCOTUS decisions. it aint a winner, and the ACLU knows it.
---
Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
Press Release: As Trials Of Waco Survivors Open In Texas, ACLU, NRA, Others Ask Clinton To Address Federal Police Abuse.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
I'm guessing that you are not aware that the ACLU was founded by a hardcore communist whose basic ideology is that you have NO individual liberties. Just a thought.
and america was founded by hardcore slaveowners. what's your point?
---
Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
I do, actually, because of a letter released by Sen. Rockefeller after Bush admitted to the program. The letter was handwritten because he was not permitted to have a secretary transcribe it for him.
There was Cowboy Neal at the wheel of a bus to never-ever land.
One thing that should be taken into account: the military is made up of people. Sure, there are a lot of sheep, hardasses, and other such members. But there are good people too.
There are also a lot of people who are, frankly, pissed off at the government. Pissed off that they've been taken from a duty that was supposedly in-country only, and shipped off to fight in a war elsewhere. Pissed off that when their stint was over, they're still stuck in another country, getting shot at, watching friends die, and fighting in that war. The are seperated from their wives, children, and family.
They're pissed off, and... trained in the use of weapons ranging from machine-guns to sniper-rifles to demolitions.
Personally, I don't think it will be a civilian that takes the first big mark against the government. I think it will be one of their own poorly-treated military personnel.
It is well known by now that the modern interpretation of the Constitution deems any warrantless search of US citizens unreasonable, and therefore illegal according to the Fourth Amendment. Concerns about the implications this may have for intelligence gathering have been addressed by FISA. So far, the only defense of the domestic spying program has hinged on the President's ability to interpret the Constitution as he pleases - clearly an indefensible position.
Given that the President has confessed to the act (if not the crime) of warrantless domestic spying, the only thing left to do is apply the due process set forth in the Constitution and let Justice be served. A lawsuit is a fine thing to have, but it doesn't address the issue that concerns so many US citizens. A message needs to be sent to this administration (and all future administrations) that they are not above the law and specifically that warrantless domestic spying will not be tolerated.
Unfortunately for us, it is understandably difficult to impeach a president from your own party. This particular congress has been especially lax in its duty to keep the president in check. The only realistic way to achieve Justice would be to start voting in congresspeople with the backbone to stand up for their constituents against a misguided administration.
We don't need a lawsuit; we need Justice.