[CWOJackson]

"American Bar Association Slams Bush's Domestic Spying Program...Vice President Cheney to deliver the President's response."

[onyx]

FGS!

[Atlas Sneezed]

Who cares what a private club of leftist lawyers think?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Not sure how Powerline News is set up for retrieval of their News article....

May not be able to find this one tomorrow.....

[MJY1288]

Considering that it is NOT a Domestic Spying Program, this is yet another worthless diatribe from the usual suspects

[guinnessman]

And these people call themselves lawyers?

Somebody should show them a copy of the U.S. Constitution, and point out Article 2, Section 2.

Or better yet, ask them to define the phrase, "Co-equal branch of government"

[Hypervigilant]

If the ABA hates it, then I love it.

[DoNotDivide]

I'd like to BODY SLAM the ABA! So there!!

[Howlin]

It opposes "any future electronic surveillance inside the United States by any U.S. government agency for foreign intelligence purposes that does not comply with provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act."

Appeals panel rejects secret court's limits on terrorist wiretaps

From Terry Frieden
CNN
Tuesday, November 19, 2002 Posted: 1:24 AM EST (0624 GMT)

---

   Story Tools

    

    

---

	VIDEO CNN's Kelli Arena says a U.S. appeals court ruling allows broad wiretap authority in the hunt for terrorists (November 18)
	MORE STORIES Justice appeals court ruling limiting information sharing
	RESOURCES • Opinion: Three-judge panel's decision  • FISA court's ruling, May 17, 2002  (FindLaw, PDF)
	SPECIAL REPORT • Interactive: • Audio slide show: •  • Special report: Terror on tape • Special report: War against terror

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States has broad authority to use wiretaps and other surveillance techniques to hunt for suspected terrorists, a federal appeals court panel ruled Monday.

In a 56-page opinion overturning a May decision by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the three-judge panel said the expanded wiretap guidelines sought by Attorney General John Ashcroft under the new USA Patriot Act law do not violate the Constitution. (More on the USA Patriot Act)

The ruling by the special panel from the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia gives broad surveillance authority to counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism investigators to track individuals considered potential national security threats.

"Our case may well involve the most serious threat our country faces," the panel declared.

The reversal of May's decision by a federal judge represents a victory for the Justice Department and the FBI, which were harshly criticized by the lower court judge for its handling of wiretap applications, and their interpretation of the authority granted the government by the USA Patriot Act.

[monkapotamus]

The United States needs at least one other association for the national accreditation of law schools.

[Fruit of the Spirit]

"The program bypassed secret courts created under the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that grant warrants. "

According to Rush Limbaugh, Pres. Carter did NOT have the authority to impose the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

The Constitution says the President has the "inherent" duty to protect the citizens of America

[albee]

"American Bar Association Slams Bush's Domestic Spying Program"

What else would you expect from a bunch of slimeball shysters?

[cvq3842]

The matter is likely moot as the exposure of the program has probably caused the terrorists to change their methods of communication.

I wonder - has chatter dropped off since December, when the leak occurred?

[Shery]

Another leftisit organization steps up to get their 2 cents in! Are there no end to them?

[Dave Olson]

"We are not trying to limit the President's ability to go after terrorists,"

Nonsense. By their own admission, the ABA is demanding that the President act only within the limits of some as yet unspecified protocol.

If Bush believes that law is inadequate then he should ask Congress to change it or enact new legislation, it adds.

The President doesn't need to do any such thing. If Congress wants to pass some law, they can do that on their own.

"Nobody wants to hamstring the President," [Neal Sonnett] adds, "But we cannot allow the U.S. Constitution and our rights to become a victim of terrorism."

Mr. Sonnet, if you are squeamish about the federal government's actions when they are done under the auspices of the President, how is it that you're ok with those same actions when they're done under the auspices of Congress?

[HankReardon]

Domestic? They have to be pretending to be stupid.

[AmericaUnited]

Idiots, charging $500/hour, who don't even know the law.

[Cboldt]

Related -> http://www.abanet.org/journal/ereport/f3surveil.html

The Federalist Society runs an "ABA Barwatch," but it hasn't weighed in yet with news of the ABA Resolution. I've not found the text of the resolution either.

[conservativecorner]

They are the single biggest donor to the demoncrats. Enough said?