Replies

Members of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review

>>> Created in 1978 by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is a star chamber that secretly issues warrants for US agencies to electronically surveil or physically search parties thought to be engaged in terrorism. The court operates in complete secrecy. We don't even know the identities of the eleven judges who make up the FISC. The only publicly-available information it releases is the number of warrants it grants per year. To date it has received over 13,000 requests, and it has granted every single one of them.

In a recent, unprecedented action, the Court declared that the "Justice Department's plan to allow prosecutors to become involved in intelligence investigations goes too far" [CNN]. (It also revealed that the FBI has lied to it in 75 cases.) Ashcroft has appealed this stinging rebuke, thereby invoking the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, which--as you might guess--reviews the decisions of the FISC. The Review Court has never met before now, since no agency or department has had reason to object to the Court's rubberstamping ways.

Although the judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court are a mystery, the three judges who comprise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review have been revealed. In the San Francisco Chronicle, Bob Egelko lists them:

"--Presiding Judge Ralph Guy. A semi-retired judge on the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, to which he was appointed in 1983, he turned 73 on Friday.

--Judge Edward Leavy. Also 73, he is a semi-retired judge on the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, appointed in 1987.

--Judge Laurence Silberman. At 66, he is a semi-retired judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, appointed in 1985."

Egelko also writes:

"The three judges are all Republicans, named to the bench by President Ronald Reagan and appointed to seven-year terms on the special review court by Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist....

Guy, a former federal prosecutor, and Leavy have reputations as moderate conservatives. The outspoken Silberman is a conservative along the lines of Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, his longtime friends."

Re/Post 24- Despite the fact that the department admitted in September of 2000 that it violated the evidence-sharing rules in 75 cases, no network ever uttered the name “Janet Reno,” the Attorney General at the time. The court that works in secret is now publicly accusing the FBI of giving it misleading information in order to get wiretaps and surveillance on spies and terrorists. The 75 cases the court cites took place during the Clinton administration. Some 75 FBI wiretap requests were rejected because the court said they were full of inaccuracies and misrepresentations.

From the Review Court...these are all Ronald Reagan's appointees...and most of the main court members have been appointed in the past five years. What they represent...is mostly the Republican view of a judge...that they observe the constitution and not make new laws out of thin air. And it would appear that they stayed true to their word. I'm betting that the administration used highly classified information to point toward to the targets of the surveillance, and they refused to fully brief the members of FISA as to the complete picture...they simply demanded an approved and stamped document...and the court shook their head in disbelief at the limited information provided. The term "trust us"...probably was used a number of times.

What happens in January....based on various blogs around the internet...is a meeting where the court will meet and possibly determine that they have no ability to control or administer the laws of the country...and they may all step down. A very drastic step and probably would guarantee senate hearings that really drag down this president.

The president really needs to step up to the plate and ensure that this relationship with the FISA court is reestablished and they work with them...otherwise, I see 2006 as a very dark year for the administration and virtually no escape from lengthly senate affair. You can talk about freedom and security all you want...but they only exist because of our dedication to the constitution over 200 years. I will stand by Ronald Reagan's ideals...they are even more worthly today than they were in 1985...we don't need courts inventing laws out of thin air, and we don't need administrations dissolving laws into thin air.