What's the number of annual requests that were approved, as compared with previous administrations?
THe problem in this is not the percentage, its the precedent setting. If its known that under a given set of circumstances the court has denied the request, it would be known that similar situations would be denied. Each denial represents a ruling that would be followed for future requests.
It may even be possible that the court could hold someone in contempt if someone knowingly tapped and asked for retroactive 72 hour approval when the circumstances were such that prior denials were given on similar situations.
What part of the constitution do you not understand.
ARTICLE IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against UNREASONABLE searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Therefore, if it is reasonable to intercept Al Quaeda communications, then no warrants are needed. End of story. Not to hard to read and understand something a friggin 8 year old could read and understand.
Even if a warrant was needed, do you not think there is probable cause to intercept the communications of Al Quaeda members and associates? Once probable cause is satisfied, all that is needed is an oath or affirmation and the name of the person. I'm preety sure that was provided to the FISA judges and therefore, there is no need to modify or reject the request.
Out of over 13,000 requests, only 2 were denied, which is less than 0.0002%. After 9/11, approximately 3% were denied, which is quite a jump, IMO. If anything, after our country was attacked and 3,000 of our citizens incinerated, you'd think the court would approve MORE of these requests, not LESS...