Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clinton Claimed Authority to Order No-Warrant Searches (Does anyone remember that?)
National Review ^ | Byron York

Posted on 12/20/2005 7:55:51 AM PST by SueRae

n a little-remembered debate from 1994, the Clinton administration argued that the president has "inherent authority" to order physical searches — including break-ins at the homes of U.S. citizens — for foreign intelligence purposes without any warrant or permission from any outside body. Even after the administration ultimately agreed with Congress's decision to place the authority to pre-approve such searches in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court, President Clinton still maintained that he had sufficient authority to order such searches on his own.

"The Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes," Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on July 14, 1994, "and that the President may, as has been done, delegate this authority to the Attorney General."

"It is important to understand," Gorelick continued, "that the rules and methodology for criminal searches are inconsistent with the collection of foreign intelligence and would unduly frustrate the president in carrying out his foreign intelligence responsibilities."

Executive Order 12333, signed by Ronald Reagan in 1981, provides for such warrantless searches directed against "a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power."

Reporting the day after Gorelick's testimony, the Washington Post's headline — on page A-19 — read, "Administration Backing No-Warrant Spy Searches." The story began, "The Clinton administration, in a little-noticed facet of the debate on intelligence reforms, is seeking congressional authorization for U.S. spies to continue conducting clandestine searches at foreign embassies in Washington and other cities without a federal court order. The administration's quiet lobbying effort is aimed at modifying draft legislation that would require U.S. counterintelligence officials to get a court order before secretly snooping inside the homes or workplaces of suspected foreign agents or foreign powers."

In her testimony, Gorelick made clear that the president believed he had the power to order warrantless searches for the purpose of gathering intelligence, even if there was no reason to believe that the search might uncover evidence of a crime. "Intelligence is often long range, its exact targets are more difficult to identify, and its focus is less precise," Gorelick said. "Information gathering for policy making and prevention, rather than prosecution, are its primary focus."

The debate over warrantless searches came up after the case of CIA spy Aldrich Ames. Authorities had searched Ames's house without a warrant, and the Justice Department feared that Ames's lawyers would challenge the search in court. Meanwhile, Congress began discussing a measure under which the authorization for break-ins would be handled like the authorization for wiretaps, that is, by the FISA court. In her testimony, Gorelick signaled that the administration would go along a congressional decision to place such searches under the court — if, as she testified, it "does not restrict the president's ability to collect foreign intelligence necessary for the national security." In the end, Congress placed the searches under the FISA court, but the Clinton administration did not back down from its contention that the president had the authority to act when necessary.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: byronyork; dhpl; eavesdropping; fisa; homelandsecurity; patriotleak; spying; surveillance; x42
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last
To: Christian4Bush
You'll definitely want to check out the Clinton Downside Legacy.
41 posted on 12/20/2005 8:52:06 AM PST by thoughtomator (Congrats Iraq!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
You'll definitely want to check out the Clinton Downside Legacy.

Bookmarked and BUMPed, with my thanks.

42 posted on 12/20/2005 8:58:35 AM PST by Christian4Bush ("The only 'new tone' we hear should be that of the Left's telephone being disconnected. " dogcaller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: SueRae
When do we bring out the miniature flip flops again? LOL!! Friggin anti-American liberal POS media!!!!
43 posted on 12/20/2005 9:18:29 AM PST by conservativecorner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach; Mo1; Sam Hill; hipaatwo; kcvl; Ernest_at_the_Beach
"The Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes," Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on July 14, 1994, "and that the President may, as has been done, delegate this authority to the Attorney General."

Oh, the irony!

44 posted on 12/20/2005 9:20:47 AM PST by Howlin (Defeatism may have its partisan uses, but it is not justified by the facts. - GWB, 12/18/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Oh Geez ... where is the popcorn .. *L*


45 posted on 12/20/2005 9:26:04 AM PST by Mo1 (Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator

Thanks!


46 posted on 12/20/2005 9:26:14 AM PST by Just A Nobody (I - LOVE - my attitude problem! WBB lives on. Beware the Enemedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: BostonianRightist
Just because JFK did it, Clinton did and Bush does it (those are three articles I've read), doesn't mean it's Constitutional.

Oh yes it is, unless and until the US Supreme Court rules otherwise.

The problem, you see, is that neither you nor any member of Congress, nor the MSM get to make that determination.

47 posted on 12/20/2005 9:28:28 AM PST by Publius6961 (The IQ of California voters is about 420........... .............cumulatively)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hipaatwo

FYI Ping


48 posted on 12/20/2005 9:30:32 AM PST by Mo1 (Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: SueRae

So who/what did Toon use it on? Inquiring minds want to know...


49 posted on 12/20/2005 9:31:15 AM PST by mewzilla (Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SueRae

bookmark


50 posted on 12/20/2005 9:32:02 AM PST by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: King of Florida
"Clinton did it" is a pretty sorry rationale for government spying on American citizens. Clinton did a lot of things that shouldn't have been done.

Back to Logic101.
You miss the argument entirely; no is is arguing that because so and so did it...

What is being asked, rightfully so, is that if it is so Constitutionally critical, why didn't all the present critics (traitors) challenge the practice then?

They were then either incompetent or complicit.

51 posted on 12/20/2005 9:32:17 AM PST by Publius6961 (The IQ of California voters is about 420........... .............cumulatively)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

And what did soon-to-be presidential candidate Hilliary Clinton know about those searches and when did she know it...?


52 posted on 12/20/2005 9:33:23 AM PST by mewzilla (Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

That's what I read to my mom but left out Clintons name until the end. LOL


53 posted on 12/20/2005 9:33:39 AM PST by hipaatwo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau; Howlin; kcvl
I thought I heard Pelosi say that Rockefeller never actually sent the July 17 2003 letter to Cheney. I'll check when I come back...unless someone wants to be diligent for me. :-)

If you find it .. could you please ping me?

54 posted on 12/20/2005 9:34:00 AM PST by Mo1 (Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
And what did soon-to-be presidential candidate Hilliary Clinton know about those searches and when did she know it...?

Question for the Dems: Excreting a brick yet?

You will be.

55 posted on 12/20/2005 9:34:25 AM PST by mewzilla (Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: rhombus
I don't know the answer but it's interesting to think about.

What's there to think about?

56 posted on 12/20/2005 9:34:51 AM PST by Publius6961 (The IQ of California voters is about 420........... .............cumulatively)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SueRae
Every President in my LIFETIME has issued an Executive Order authorizing warrantless searches for enemy agents and their associates.

This whole PRESIDENT BROKE THE LAW crowd are digging a hole they may never escape from.

Here is HOPING like hell that the AG starts an investigation to get the NY Times to divulge THEIR SOURCE for this infomration and hang the traitor that released Top Secret information to the press.

Wanna bet it is a SENATOR?.........Anyone?

57 posted on 12/20/2005 9:35:10 AM PST by PISANO (We will not tire......We will not falter.......We will NOT FAIL!!! .........GW Bush [Oct 2001])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #58 Removed by Moderator

Comment #59 Removed by Moderator

To: Celtman
many conservatives have the misconceptions that the Constitution does not apply to foreigners in the US, and ...

Silliest thing I ever heard.
Please cite any documented applications of Constitutional rights, or even discussion about it, against foregn combatants in, say, the War of 1812.

Please take your time and don't change the subject.

60 posted on 12/20/2005 9:39:59 AM PST by Publius6961 (The IQ of California voters is about 420........... .............cumulatively)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson