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

To: hipaatwo; onyx
Thanks for the ping!.... Hugh Hewitt blog is posting some comments on this and interviewing some legal folks. First comment here:

One Judge and the National Security
by Hugh Hewitt

Second here:

U.S. District Court Judges Royce Lamberth and Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, Part 2
by Hugh Hewitt
February 9, 2006 09:09 AM PST

Third here:

Judges Royce Lamberth and Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, Part 3
by Hugh Hewitt
February 9, 2006 04:59 PM PST

*************** From the Blog *************************

I interviewed Professor Jonathan Adler of Case Western Reserve University School of Law, Professor Erwin Chemerinsky of Duke Law School and Professor John Eastman of Chapman University Law School about the conduct of the two chief judges of the FISA court. All three are troubled by the allegations made in the Washington Post article.

Transcripts of these interviews will be posted at Radioblogger.com later in the day.

84 posted on 02/09/2006 11:33:14 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Just scanning through the links you provided. As to the criticism that Kotelly can't make the weighty decisions by herself, the article says that she is the only one "in the know," and that the administration deliberately restricts its information sharing.

In other words, "it's not her fault she was sworn to secrecy" and it's unfair to criticize her for keeping the secret.

The second piece raises a thought provoking question that amount to whether or not the NSA activity needs to be bootstrapped into legitimacy by a FISA warrant. It bumps into a question I've been wondering since December, "how is the information used?"

The third piece links to a transcript, which is where all the substantive discussion takes place.

EC: I think what it points to is we need the legislature to be doing this, not judges on their own doing this.

An interesting proposition too - but the administration seems reluctant to enage Congress as well, out of various concerns such as disclosure of procedures and methods, etc.

I see in short, that the administration seeks to justify self-management of the scope of surveillance.

Good links, thanks.

85 posted on 02/10/2006 4:34:48 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach


Place marking and thank you for the posting and the pingaling.


86 posted on 02/10/2006 4:47:06 AM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | 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