Challenge to Secret Wiretaps Is Dismissed

NYT ^ | July 7, 2007 | ADAM LIPTAK

[xtinct]

A divided federal appeals court yesterday dismissed a case challenging the National Security Agency’s program to wiretap without warrants the international communications of some Americans, reversing a trial judge’s order that the program be shut down.

The majority in a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati, ruled on a narrow ground, saying the plaintiffs, including lawyers and journalists, could not show injury direct and concrete enough to allow them to have standing to sue.

Because it may be impossible for any plaintiff to demonstrate injury from the highly classified wiretapping program, the effect of the ruling was to insulate it from judicial scrutiny. Thus, the program’s secrecy is proving to be its best legal protection.

The majority did not rule on the merits of the case, though the appeals court judge who wrote the lead opinion, Judge Alice M. Batchelder, said the case had provoked “a cascade of serious questions.” She listed five, including whether the program violated a 1978 law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, along with the First and Fourth Amendments to the Constitution.

[xtinct]

Score 1 for the good guys!!!

[HiTech RedNeck]

score one for the secreteers, whether their enterprise be fair or foul

[TINS]

agreed. you’ll excuse me if I don’t quite understand what’s so conservative about the President wiretapping people without a warrant. I sure as heck don’t want Hillary to have that power.

[MadPenguin]

As I understand this policy, the “wiretap” is against a foreign national with known or suspected terrorist connections/associations. If this individual has a conversation with an American citizen, that conversation is subject to intelligence collection.

So, what the libs want is for the NSA to stop listening to this target every time an American is involved in the conversation. Makes sense, right? A terrorist is working with an American against this country and we turn and look the other way!

Sorry, but I can’t accept this thought process. There is no rights violations here. When a criminal suspect is under surveillance in this country, we don’t stop watching when he/she interacts with non-suspects.

We must watch our enemies, regardless of who chooses to work with them.

[RushLake]

"I sure as heck don’t want Hillary to have that power."

The Clintons demonstrated for eight long years that they could do just about any thing they wanted to do during their first presidency. They will do whatever they want during the next one. They probably countenanced cold blooded murder of innocents at Waco, held FBI files over people's heads that might have exposed their shenanigans, perhaps had murder committed on their behalf, hired at least one two bit thug to spy on their enemies. I wonder, will the MSM be so quick to point out their failings or alleged failings as they have every frigging time GWB blinks wrong? I'm sure the Clintons won't let a pesky thing like the Constitution interfere with their agenda of firmly planting the boot on our necks, and they will be celebrated for it.

[xzins]

wiretapping people

They were wiretapping terrorists and terrorist associates inside and outside the US.

I 'spose some people think that's just awful. Me...I think that's the President's job.

[SkyPilot]

The Clintons demonstrated for eight long years that they could do just about any thing they wanted to do during their first presidency. They will do whatever they want during the next one. They probably countenanced cold blooded murder of innocents at Waco, held FBI files over people's heads that might have exposed their shenanigans, perhaps had murder committed on their behalf, hired at least one two bit thug to spy on their enemies.

Amen.

When the Clintons were in power, I could not believe how corrupt they were, and how little their friends in the MSM cared.

It was like I woke up inside the old Soviet Union overnight.

The good that came out of that was that good people rose up. This site (thanks to Jim Robinson and other) was a direct result.

If the Clintons get back into the White House, expect it to be ten times worse. They will be looking for payback at any real or alleged slight to their precious egos.

[Raycpa]

Using this logic we should ban radar because it monitors people in moving objects without a court order and don’t get me started on those surveillance cameras

[R.W.Ratikal]

It really takes someone who is terminally naive to expect to have privacy when he takes to the airwaves to communicate.

It would certainly be a disaster if, after spending billions on high-tech listening devices and equipment that we were not using them to keep tabs on our enemies. And not just our enemies. Governments spy on each other. Israel spies on the U.S. Britain spies on Canada. Germany spies on Belgium. France spies on Iraq. Communist China spies on everyone.

[TINS]

they don’t have to stop. FISA court review is retroactive—Administration officials can wiretap at all and get a warrant up to three days later.

That’s not a lot to ask to make sure that there’s at least a modicum of accountability. Without a court review, who’s to know who they’re wiretapping? They could be wiretapping *anybody* for all anyone knows.

[TINS]

now that’s scary. you think the government should just be able to listen to anyone’s calls?