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

To: inquest; conserv13; lugsoul
I think each of you might benefit from reviewing the cites in post #289
297 posted on 01/18/2006 7:30:55 PM PST by Boot Hill ("...and Joshua went unto him and said: art thou for us, or for our adversaries?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies ]


To: Boot Hill
I think each of you might benefit from reviewing the cites in post #289

The only one that pertains to what I'm talking about is at the bottom, where the lower court says it "takes it for granted" that "FISA could not encroach on" the President's power to engage in warrantless searches for foreign-intelligence gathering. That's a pretty bold position to be taking for granted! Basically it would mean that all the President would have to do is say that he's conducting espionage (even on U.S. citizens here in the U.S.) for the purpose of foreign intelligence gathering, and no one could question it.

In any case, though, the court in that case ruled that FISA had in fact been followed, so their pronouncement about whether or not FISA can restrict the President is just dictum. And very ill-considered dictum, at that.

302 posted on 01/18/2006 8:12:37 PM PST by inquest (If you favor any legal status for illegal aliens, then do not claim to be in favor of secure borders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies ]

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