Skip to comments.
Judge orders end to NSA wiretapping
baltimoresun.com ^
| August 17, 2006
| Sarah Karush
Posted on 08/17/2006 9:49:00 AM PDT by neverdem
Associated Press
Government's warrantless spying found to violate free speech, privacy rights
DETROIT -- A federal judge ruled today 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; US: Michigan; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: aclu; activistjudge; annadiggstaylor; counterterrorism; judiciary; nsa; ruling; spying; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 161-180 next last
To: lepton
"what court has the authority to issue a warrant that is valid outside of the United States and its territories?"
You don't need a warrant for purely foreign eavesdropping. Thats not what I'm concerned about.
101
posted on
08/17/2006 12:25:34 PM PDT
by
ndt
To: DoughtyOne
They don't even have to wait. FISA allows them to wiretap before getting the warrant.
102
posted on
08/17/2006 12:28:33 PM PDT
by
lugsoul
(Livin' in fear is just another way of dying before your time. - Mike Cooley)
To: MiHeat
Yes. The people should rise up and fight to give the Federal government even more power over them.
103
posted on
08/17/2006 12:29:48 PM PDT
by
lugsoul
(Livin' in fear is just another way of dying before your time. - Mike Cooley)
To: WhiteGuy
These calls where coming from overseas.
Are you aware that we used this system to help the Brits break up the plot in London???
104
posted on
08/17/2006 12:31:42 PM PDT
by
mware
(Americans in armchairs doing the job of the media.)
To: CertainInalienableRights
There is a strong anti-civil rights streak around here these days You can't have any civil rights if you are dead.
105
posted on
08/17/2006 12:32:58 PM PDT
by
mware
(Americans in armchairs doing the job of the media.)
To: hardknocks
Funny part is you'd expect the Clinton News Network to be all over this, but the only one I've seen mention it so far is Fox News. Mo Joe's poll numbers just went up another 10 points.
106
posted on
08/17/2006 12:35:17 PM PDT
by
mware
(Americans in armchairs doing the job of the media.)
To: mware
You can't have any civil rights if you are dead.
A point missed by several on this thread.
To: mware
I guess that days of Patrick henry are gone!
108
posted on
08/17/2006 12:59:11 PM PDT
by
pw2000
(data rules.)
To: pw2000
UPDATE: This from the Justice Department: "The parties have also agreed to a stay of the injunction until the District Court can hear the Department's motion for a stay pending appeal."
109
posted on
08/17/2006 1:01:31 PM PDT
by
mware
(Americans in armchairs doing the job of the media.)
To: mware
"You can't have any civil rights if you are dead."
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The is a difference between sacrificing convenience and sacrificing an inalienable right. If you sacrifice rights, you never thought they were inalienable in the first place as was made very clear in the founding documents of this country.
And yes, the Constitution is a death pact. If if we are not willing to stand by it till the end, it's not worth the paper it was written on.
110
posted on
08/17/2006 1:07:20 PM PDT
by
ndt
To: ndt
Oh I stand by the Constitution. This judge over reached bigtime in her ruling.
111
posted on
08/17/2006 1:11:34 PM PDT
by
mware
(Americans in armchairs doing the job of the media.)
To: ndt
Well said ndt. The terrorists win everytime we huddle like sheep for our physical survival and give up our rights and our freedoms in exchange.
112
posted on
08/17/2006 1:13:16 PM PDT
by
pw2000
(data rules.)
To: ndt
You don't need a warrant for purely foreign eavesdropping. Thats not what I'm concerned about. You're apparently concerned that the phone calls of foreign agents, located outside of the United States are not protected when they call people within the bounds of the United States.
You may somehow not be aware, but when even domestic phone-tap warrants are given, they don't specify all of the participants in the calls to be monitored. In that case, and the previous case, if ANY of the participants of the call can be monitored, the calls can be monitored.
113
posted on
08/17/2006 1:17:46 PM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: Calpernia
Gee, I wish I could sue the Government every time it violated the legal rights of SOMEONE ELSE and indirectly made my life more difficult. Under all the rules applicable to cases not prosecuted by the Commies, I wouldn't have STANDING to bring the suit.
114
posted on
08/17/2006 1:24:55 PM PDT
by
Iconoclast2
(Two wings of the same bird of prey . . .)
To: WhiteGuy; ohioman; teawithmisswilliams
And who says history does not repeat itself?
The claim that NSA cannot collect intel from foreigners reminds me of FDR's Sec of State Cordell Hull on the eve of Pearl Harbor who declared that gentlemen do not open the mail of other gentlemen.
Signal intelligence is essential. To not listen to overseas communications in time of war is criminal.
115
posted on
08/17/2006 1:29:01 PM PDT
by
Jacquerie
(Democrats soil institutions.)
To: Virginia Ridgerunner
Oops. Thanks for the correction.
116
posted on
08/17/2006 1:31:57 PM PDT
by
MEGoody
(Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
To: Marius3188
Thanks for the correction.
117
posted on
08/17/2006 1:34:40 PM PDT
by
MEGoody
(Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
To: defenderSD
You just made WhiteGuy's argument for him. The argument for going to FISA is to limit the power of Bill/Hill types of presidents. Hillary had access to almost a thousand raw FBI files. As a practical matter she was above the law then and likely will be in the future, no matter what any laws says.
118
posted on
08/17/2006 1:53:26 PM PDT
by
Jacquerie
(Democrats soil institutions.)
To: lepton
"You may somehow not be aware, but when even domestic phone-tap warrants are given, they don't specify all of the participants in the calls to be monitored."
In the case of the domestic tap, there was a warrant in the first place. In the case of the foreign calls, there was no warrant since it was not needed, but once a U.S. person becomes involved that ceases to be the case. As far as our government goes, U.S. persons are a treated differently than foreign ones.
119
posted on
08/17/2006 1:53:28 PM PDT
by
ndt
To: gc4nra; DoughtyOne
"You forgot the sarcasm tag. That remark is dripping, I mean dripping." Ya think! I long for the good old days on FR, when people were bright enough to get IT!
That remark was so dripping with sarcasm my feet were wet when I got up to leave my computer. :)
I too was a bit surprised more people didn't see through it immediately.
120
posted on
08/17/2006 1:59:36 PM PDT
by
Chuck54
( "Your right to privacy is not as important as my right to live".)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 161-180 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson