Posted on 08/17/2006 9:25:06 AM PDT by slowhand520
Judge Nixes Warrantless Surveillance
Email this Story
Aug 17, 12:10 PM (ET)
By SARAH KARUSH
DETROIT (AP) - A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.
U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.
The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs. They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, which involves secretly taping conversations between people in the U.S. and people in other countries.
The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.
The ACLU said the state-secrets argument was irrelevant because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule
Judge: Wiretap Program Unconstitutional
By SARAH KARUSH, Associated Press Writer
Thursday, August 17, 2006
A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.
U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.
The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs. They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, which involves secretly taping conversations between people in the U.S. and people in other countries.
The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.
The ACLU said the state-secrets argument was irrelevant because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/08/17/national/a090059D26.DTL
Check it out:
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060807/NEWS05/608070381/1001/NEWS&template=printart
"violates the rights to free speech and privacy."
If that is the case then this ruling is on life support :-)
Another reason to keep such programs secret. No court challenges would come up.
It is a given that members of the media are in direct communication (not always BUT they DO communicate) with Al Qaeda. Time Magazine has such a reporter (from Australia).
They don't want to be brought up as working with the enemy.
When you factor in Peter Jennings and Mike Wallace's comments on "reporting from the enemy side", you can see why they claim "free speech" and privacy)
Carter appointee.
In 1979, three years after she campaigned for Jimmy Carter's presidential bid, Carter rewarded Taylor with a lifetime appointment to U.S. District Court in Detroit.
Prior to her appointment to the Federal Court in 1979, Judge Taylor was a private practitioner, a legislative assistant, an Assistant Wayne County Prosecutor, an Assistant United States Attorney, an Adjunct Professor of Law at Wayne State Law School, and an Assistant Corporation Counselor, City of Detroit. She is a 1950 Graduate of the Northfield School for Girls, East Northfield, Massachusetts, and received her B.A. from Barnard College in 1954 and L.L.B. from Yale Law School in 1957. Judge Taylor was appointed to the bench on November 2, 1979.
She is a Trustee of the Detroit Institute of Arts, the Community Foundation for Southeastern Michigan and the Henry Ford Health System.
She is a member of the State Bar (Committees on Character and Fitness and on U.S. Courts), Federal Bar, Wolverine Bar, Black Judges Association and Women Judges Association.
Interested in Opposing Today's ACLU NSA Lawsuit? . . .
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/01/interested_in_t.html
Hmmmmm.... an African-American Democrat woman judge who helped get Jimmy Carter into office.
I'll stick with the FISA Judges, thank you!
"FISA judges say Bush within law"
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20060329-120346-1901r.htm
This was already on Rush, and on FR. It will come to nothing.
Bush needs to make examples of these nitwit judges by exposing them. Background, party affiliation, etc. Hopefully the SC will overturn. Otherwise what army does this judge have to enforce her dumb decision? Maybe it is time to ignore these judges. It's obvious this judge has no understanding of the Constitution.
This is one time the Executive needs to ignore a ruling by the Judiciary. The President is the sole person authorized to conduct war and this is a war!
Why do such organizations exist?
Black Judges Association and Women Judges Association.
Yeppers. When decision is poor - must ignore
You Can't Connect the Dots?
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004297.htm
these dam Libs Dont Care they just dont its all about there power thats it im sick of it i really am sick of it
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.