[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.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Thanks Howlin....I am confused by the ABA even doing their resolution....aren't there members other than Criminal Defense Lasyers in the ABA?

[Fruit of the Spirit]

",,,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."

YEAH! That means Ashcroft can go after the NY Times for spilling the beans.

[Buckhead]

Howlin, that article refers to In Re: Sealed Case, which is a very important chapter in this overall story.

As of the date of the opinion, one of the primary proponents in DOJ of "The Wall" had moved to the FISA Court to become its legal advisor.

The government took the position in that case that the Wall was an erroneous reading of FISA even before the Patriot Act, and the Court agreed. Moreover, a specific purpose of the Patriot Act was to eliminate the Wall as a barrier between foreign intelligence and criminal law enforcement.

Nevertheless, *after* we had been attacked, and *after* the Patriot Act had been passed, the FISA Court, on its own, adopted a set of regulations that effetively rebuilt the wall.

The FISA Court of Review administered a severe smack down in this opinion, holding that the lower court's rules rebuilding the wall were dead wrong.

Now we come to find out that they have again imposed a unilateral requirement that none of the NSA Surveillance take can be used to support a FISA warrant application. This is another misread of the law.

As for our pals at the ABA, they are taking the position that under the AUMF we can kill al Qaeda, we just can't listen to their phone calls.