Skip to comments.Sen. Rand Paul: "I don't think the FISA Court is Constitutional for Americans"
Posted on 05/13/2020 10:04:38 AM PDT by RandFan
Sen. Rand Paul speaks to members of the press regarding FISA reform:
"If you do not exempt Americans from the FISA court then the FISA court could do this again. They could go after a political candidate they could go after a religious figure, they can go after an issue group, a pro-life group. I'm very fearful of letting that power of remaining with FISA so my amendment would get Americans out of FISA and say if you wan to spy on Americans you can but you have to go to a regular Constitutional Court and get a warrant."
Click excerpt link to Watch
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
After reading about how Whitmer summarily stripped the defiant barber of his barber’s license, after hours, and without due process through the Licensing Board, I’m not sure the USA is reliably constitutional for Americans.
It may be constitutional in one sense, but unconstitutional under the Necessary and Proper” clause.
Some strange comments on twitter...
This is absolute BS! FISA Warrants are perfectly legal and an integral part of the the Judiciary Branch. The GOP can no longer make the claim they are they law and order party! They’re the Crooks and Traitor Party!
Rand is right. There were many who had big concerns about this including many on the “left” and those fears have proven correct.
It was abused for unlawful purposes outside the scope for which it existed. You cannot give limitless powers to government and rely on their good name and reputation to not abuse it.
Secret courts have no place in a free country.
FISA is borderline constitutional for aliens, definitely unconstitutional for American citizens.
I think federal government domestic surveillance doesn’t pass the Necessary and Proper constitutional test. It does more harm than good and gives the feds way too much harmful power.
Not legal if unconstitutional. I has been well settled for 200 years that the Constitution gives the feds no police power. Police power strictly belongs to the states. FISA domestic surveillance gives the feds such power and, thus, is not constitutional. And if it's not constitutional for the feds, then it is illegal regardless of the Judiciary Branch or any other branch.
Copy and paste the above to reply to this nonsense Twitter post and see what you get. (Twitter bounced me a long time ago because I think I was cheering too loud for Trump.)
If an American citizen is working on behalf of a foreign power then FI (Foreign intelligence) should apply. The problem is with the false allegations.
Do you think this will stop the abuse?
Rand thinks this one will pass and it will go back to the House. Trump might think its sufficient but Rand is not so sure...
Yeh Rand neither do I.
Yep, now what
If it is possible to do then someone will do it. If our agencies dont do it then another will do it for them. It all gets back to the ethics and character of the people we put in power. We need checks in their power. Independent outside review of their activities. Somehow Congress is not doing that job.
Secret courts hearing secret evidence in secret hearings, then issuing secret rulings. It’s like something right out of the Communist China playbook.
Open courts. Witnesses you can confront. Evidence you can dispute. Adversarial attorneys. If the government doesn’t have a case without all these things, then the government doesn’t have a case.
Considering the confirmation dares of a couple of those FISA judges, I’d say the fix was in before they were appointed.
Which also drags Roberts into this mess.