Court: Wiretap program is illegal (Idiot Judge is a Democrat Alert)

dallas morning news/McClatchy ^ | 8/18/2006 | Ron Hutcheson, Margaret Taley

[tobyhill]

WASHINGTON – In a scathing rebuke, a federal judge ruled Thursday that the Bush administration's warrantless eavesdropping program is unconstitutional and should be shut down, but legal scholars said federal authorities have a good chance of reversing the decision on appeal.

"There are no hereditary kings in America and no power not created by the Constitution," U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor of Detroit said in a 43-page opinion blasting the program.

Judge Taylor said the program, which President Bush secretly approved after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, violated the rights of free speech and privacy and went far beyond the president's authority. Administration officials say the surveillance program targets telephone calls and e-mails between the United States and terror suspects overseas.

While the ruling was a clear victory for Mr. Bush's critics, it didn't end the legal battle over the secret eavesdropping. Legal scholars said the administration had a good chance of winning its appeal to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, which handles cases from Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee.

"This isn't the definitive word," said Bruce Fein, a Washington lawyer who agreed with Judge Taylor's conclusions. "This is going to the 6th Circuit. If the 6th Circuit goes against the government, it's going to the Supreme Court."

Carl Tobias, a constitutional scholar at the University of Richmond's law school, said the 6th Circuit tended to be sympathetic to the government's national-security concerns.

"There are more judges on that court who come down on the national security end of the spectrum than the civil liberties end," he said. "The majority probably would reverse this decision."

Judge Taylor, a Democrat whom President Jimmy Carter appointed to the court,

[GOPJ]

bump

[Neoliberalnot]

"I am becoming more and more disillusioned in "the rule of law" in our country. It is being abused!"

Of coures it is being abused. Selective enforcement of the law has been occurring for decades. Check the Kennedy cases and the OJ Simpson case out.

[Fishrrman]

tobyhill wrote:
This judge needed to be booted from the case from the start for prejudicial bias.

Are you kiddin'? That's why she GOT the case to begin with!

- John

[tobyhill]

I know how she got the case, judge shopping, but I also blame the Government Lawyers for not filing any motions to have her removed based anything because everything she's done is idiotic.

[Obadiah]

Activist, Leftist, Carter Appointee, Diggs-Taylor

[Inwoodian]

National Lawyers Guild, a Commie front. Say no more.

[tobyhill]

BTW; part of her ruling says she's giving standing because of the "very secrecy of activity" but then she says she's giving standing because the program isn't so secret. She said the plaintiffs suffered damages but can only come up with restricted in their jobs yet doesn't even know who or how they're being restricted. She can't even make heads or tails of her own ruling and that makes me wonder if she was bought out?

[EQAndyBuzz]

""There are no hereditary kings in America and no power not created by the Constitution," U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor of Detroit said in a 43-page opinion blasting the program."

Tell that to 5 supreme court justices.

[tobyhill]

"no power not created by the Constitution"

If she actually believes and respects this then she would know that her ruling contradicts it because she's intruding on the executives authority. She is also inserting herself in the conduct of war by the attempted elimination of a military operation. Now she and with the GITMO USSC ruling have arbitrarily decided that they are the most important decider's of how a war is conducted.

[Cheburashka]

She should be impeached by Congress, but they don't have the spine for anything remotely like wresting the reins of government from the judicial oligarchy.
---
Face the reality that no Democrat will ever vote to remove her from office for this, and possibly for anything. Therefore impeachment would be political theater and nothing more. I prefer to fight battles we can actually win.

[MarkeyD]

You beat me to it.

[Don Corleone]

If the Rats think that she will help their cause and want to put "Democrat" by her name it's their loss

I don't know how it is where you live but here in southern Arizona all the Democrat campaign posters and signs OMIT the party affiliation. OTOH the Republican candidates proudly advertize theirs.

[tobyhill]

Here in North Texas it's solidly Republican and most of the signs for the Democrats just have a "D" by their name and the Republican Signs say,"Proud Republican".

[MizSterious]

A Jimmy Carter appointee, apparently. Ah, yes, Jimmy Carter--the gift that keeps on giving....

[radar101]

One word describes her: Kool-Aid Drinker

[Sgt_Schultze]

and no power not created by the Constitution

Beyond your comments, the Constitution confers exactly NO specific power to the courts to rule on the constitutionality of any law.

If the affirmative-action judge acually believed her statement, she would have not even heard the case.

[tobyhill]

You're right on.