Posted on 08/18/2006 4:26:08 AM PDT by Marius3188
You don't have to be a Philadelphia lawyer to understand the First Amendment guarantee of free speech is fundamental to everything we are -- and to regard anyone who tries an end run around it as someone who deserves a bracing smackdown.
Presidents of both parties are sometimes tempted to try an end run or a shortcut because the Constitution can get in the way of the easiest way to enforce the law. The ruling yesterday by a federal judge in Detroit that the government's wiretapping without a warrant is unconstitutional and must be stopped at once should have been unnecessary. There's a law that enables the government to get a warrant, but sometimes a president and his attorney general think that's too much trouble.
The judge, Anna Diggs Taylor, ordered a permanent injunction -- temporarily stayed to allow appeal to higher courts -- barring agents of the National Security Agency's Terrorist Surveillance Program from listening to conversations between American citizens and suspect parties abroad. "It was never the intent of the framers [of the Constitution] to give the president such unfettered control, particularly when his actions blatantly disregard the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights," she wrote (and continued for another 42 pages).
The Bush administration argues that it has the right to eavesdrop without a warrant because this enables the government to move quickly to protect American lives. The government says proving it would reveal state secrets. "We could tell you," the attorney general is saying, "but then we would have to kill you."
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Oh sure so we can all read about it in the Washington post before the wire tap takes place.
If the liberals want the Government to protect them (which is it's primary function)then they should stop painting targets on our chests. I Belive that liberals thik the primary function of government is the provision of a nipple from which they may suckle from for life but that is not the case.
Here is a suggestion for them: Spend a few dollars and buy some of that grow a big thing stuff and then take your now bigger thing and use it on yourself - now I feel better
As usual Wes Pruden with his knee jerk Bush hate is absurd in his "analysis". The Presidents Commander in Chief powers are NOT subject to the whimsy of the Judiciary and the Congress. The concept of the Co Equal branches of Govt seems too difficult for the knee jerk Bush haters child level intellects to grasp.
Rather then waste time on the absurd nonsense of Pruden, I suggest people read this analysis by one of the best Legal Minds in the Country. This is serious analysis of the matter based on the Law, not the emotion based hysteria of Know Nothings like Pruden.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1685444/posts
Judge Not (NSA ruling-Mark Levin opinion)
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/e027d718-008f-4d11-8a97-baa9e63b6304
Check this out, not even the wacko Leftists agree with Pruden.
*****Snip******
"BTW: In case you think the laughing that has greeted the opinion is simply conservatives putting on their blinders, I give you DailyKos diarist Categorically Imperative's analysis "Today's NSA ruling: poorly reasoned and totally unhelpful," which concludes:"
I generally like Wes Pruden, but he seems to have really, really gone off the deep end here. And you're right, he is totally wrong about this, and even the female leftist filling in for Mara last night on the FOX panel used terms like "poorly reasoned", "politically motivated", "reaching" (as it pertained to the standing of the plaintiffs", and "screed". Boy, did Fred sound surprised when he had to agree with her! When you have leftists saying it is an unsupportable decision, it is probably an unsupportable decision.
A judge cannot be expected to adjudicate a nonjuridical matter. Subpoenas are juridical devices, not foreign policy devices. They are of significance in a courtroom, not on a battlefield.
The best response for the President is to make perfectly clear that the separation of powers does not allow judges to declare war or to set the terms of warfare.
Let the Prez be Commander in Chief and judges reign over their courtrooms.
I totally agree, but tell THAT to the judges!
One of the reasons I enjoy FR is that I learn new stuff every day.
If you're talking with someone in a cave in Afghanistan or a hut in Fallujah, we're listening in on the foreign end of the conversation because it has no expectation of privacy. Your end is incidental.
If you're talking to someone in a mosque in Detroit, there should be a warrant involved. But how deeply have Muslim operatives penetrated our legal system, to warn terror suspects of warrants issued?
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.