Slashdot Mirror
ACLU Files Lawsuit Challenging FISA
Wired's Threat Level blog reports that the American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit contesting the constitutionality of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Recently passed by both the House and Senate, FISA was signed into law on Thursday by President Bush. The ACLU has fought aspects of FISA in the past. The new complaint (PDF) alleges the following:
"The law challenged here supplies none of the safeguards that the Constitution demands. It permits the government to monitor the communications of U.S. Citizens and residents without identifying the people to be surveilled; without specifying the facilities, places, premises, or property to be monitored; without observing meaningful limitations on the retention, analysis, and dissemination of acquired information; without obtaining individualized warrants based on criminal or foreign intelligence probable cause; and, indeed, without even making prior administrative determinations that the targets of surveillance are foreign agents or connected in any way, however tenuously, to terrorism."
The government can't win for losing in this situation. Either they are impeding on perceived Constitutional protections or it fails in its Constitutional directive to protect its citizens. Which one takes precedence? I don't see any way for a compromise that can accomplish both.
As far as I know, there is no Constitutional right to privacy. The government, however, is specifically directed to protect its citizens. Courts are already spitting on the the second amendment. It says in black and white that citizens can bear arms. Period. It is not up for "interpretation". Where is the ACLU here?
If you read the Constitution, you can see that it was written in such a way that there is no need for interpretation. It was written in lay terms for the time so that everyone could understand it. Believe it or not, it actually means what it says. It's a very simple document that creates the government, sets out the responsibilities of the government and limits the power of the government it created.
I don't understand people who want to limit the ability of the government to protect us. Was the lack of communication between local police, the FBI, and CIA during the Clinton years, which led to 9/11, not a big enough eye opener?
The ACLU is a private enterprise with its own agenda and does not care about the safety of U.S citizens. It's no different than "big oil" or "big business" that it is so fond of going after. The only difference is that "big business" is after money and the ACLU and its ilk is after power and control. It, along with environmental groups, is a mouthpiece for socialist movement in the U.S. The ACLU was not elected by the people and does not represent the people. It has no respect for the Constitution, but relies on it when politically expedient.
Bullshit, the ACLU doesn't love the constitution, they love their specific pet bits of it. Always have.
hopefully you won't ask the US supreme court to comment on the definition terrorism, since they are a Catholic majority and seek to defer to the Pope on all matters, and the Pope says terrorism is disagreeing with him:
Vatican calls verbal attack on Pope terrorism
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL0211344020070502