Posted on 08/17/2006 9:06:43 AM PDT by sinkspur
A federal district judge in Detroit has ruled that the Bush administration's NSA surveillance of phone conversations is unconstitutional.
As far as I can tell it's just Diggs or whatever her name is. I'll call her the ACLU whore.
Sorry if that's harsh but since we're both from Philly we know that's tame..LOL
The USSC lost my confidence when it ruled on GITMO.
Even the legal commentator on CNN made your point. Evidently the gov't didn't even defend the case on the merits; it just argued that plaintiff's didn't have standing (or some other jurisdictional argument). The commentator was actually fairly amazed that the judge ruled on the merits and was even more amazed that she ordered an immediate halt to the program. Seems like this judge may come out looking like an idiot.
LOL .. yes that is tame
I;m not worried....
I'm not even sure the USSC will even look at the case to be honest.
If the District rules on it, maybe the USSC will take a pass.
Thailand?
Did not know that Northfield was ever a school just for girls.
The judge admitted they didn't have standing but she also claims she had no choice but to rule because the government refused to give up national security secrets. She's trying to have it both way, if they didn't have standing the case should have ended regardless what the government was willing to reveal.
This traitor should be taken out back and SHOT. Period. Not a joke, not sarcasm. I'm tired of this terrorist-allied judicial legislators.
You're right. The judge is required to determine standing first. If there is none, the case ends. What a maroon.
In Detroit?
What's his name - Abdul What?
|
|
I'd say that's the first impression (they've no common sense), except it's a pattern. They continually steer our ship towards the falls. Agreed. They lack common sense like a fox lacks craftiness. They know exactly what they're doing. It's the "useful idiots" who don't have common sense. Aargh, I say it's time for them to be put off in their own little boat, eh, Mr. Christian? Aye! |
She was a member of the Eisenhower administration.
Add CFR and their eminent domain ruling and I am right there with you.
Snicker
I also blame these Government lawyers for not filing motions to have these judges dismissed from the cases based on prejudicial biases. Get the judges records, find out who they had lunch with, how many drinks they had for lunch, organizations they spoke to or accepted money from, etc...
UPDATE: I’ve started reading the opinion. The first thing that strikes me is that how Judge dismissed the government’s claim that the Plaintiff’s could not prove their conversations were being monitored. She relied on the affidavits of lawyers and a journalist who admitted they had contacts with terrorist organizations and people accused of helping the insurgency in Iraq. So when faced with admissions of people that they are in contact with alleged terrorist organizations - the Judge ordered the government to stop listening. Why? Because it impeded their ability to conduct research, engage in advocacy, interact with sources, and represent clients. The Judge also noted the financial “hardships” these Plaintiffs would face in having to travel to meet these people. This apparently trumps national security. This is insanity.
http://www.anklebitingpundits.com/content/?p=546
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
