Posted on 08/18/2006 7:44:41 AM PDT by upchuck
Judge Taylor's opinion is certainly long on throat-clearing sound bites. "There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution," she thunders. She declares that "the public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution." And she insists that Mr. Bush has "undisputedly" violated the First and Fourth Amendments, the constitutional separation of powers, and federal surveillance law.
But the administration does, in fact, vigorously dispute these conclusions. Nor is its dispute frivolous. The NSA's program, about which many facts are still undisclosed, exists at the nexus of inherent presidential powers, laws purporting to constrict those powers, the constitutional right of the people to be free from unreasonable surveillance, and a broad congressional authorization to use force against al-Qaeda. That authorization, the administration argues, permits the wiretapping notwithstanding existing federal surveillance law; inherent presidential powers, it suggests, allow it to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance on its own authority. You don't have to accept either contention to acknowledge that these are complicated, difficult issues. Judge Taylor devotes a scant few pages to dismissing them, without even discussing key precedents.
The judge may well be correct in her bottom line that the program exceeds presidential authority, even during wartime. We harbor grave doubt both that Congress authorized warrantless surveillance as part of the war and that Mr. Bush has the constitutional power to act outside of normal surveillance statutes that purport to be the exclusive legal authorities for domestic spying. But her opinion, which as the first court venture into this territory will garner much attention, is unhelpful either in evaluating or in ensuring the program's legality. Fortunately, as this case moves forward on appeal and as other cases progress in other courts, it won't be the last word.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
And she's probably well on the road to senility.
To top it all off, she don't know jack about governmental powers:
"no powers not created by the Constitution"
This is the typical Lefty trying to flim-flam people into believing that the Constitution "creates" all things.
The Creator creates all things, Ms. Taylor, and don't you forget it.
(My "don't forget it" admonition is probably a bit too late for Ms. Taylor, if yaknowwhutahmean) ;-)
Could you imagine being up in front of her, and her finding out that you are a conservative opposed to everything she stands for?
What's left of her brain would explode out her ears as she started foaming at the mouth and calling for your summary execution...
The plaintiffs consist of:
- Three ACLU groups
- Two CAIR groups
- Greenpeace
- Criminal defense lawyers
- Christopher Hitchens (in whom I am sorely disappointed to see his name on this, since he often shows signs of respectability)
-James Banford, representing journalist traitors
-Larry Diamond, representing academia traitors
-Tara McKelvey, representing the Loony Left
-Barnett R. Rubin, representing anti-sovereignty globalists.
The judicial system is the seat of tyranny in the U.S.
bump
I'd like to thank Taylor for making Granholm's reelection less likely, even with the unusual level of falsified ballots which Kwame's machine will generate in Wayne County.
It's hard to tell parody from truth these days!
"The problem is, the WaPo understands that in fact the opposite effect is what will be noticed...."
BINGO!!!!The ComPost has figured out this isn't gonna play well at the voting booth!!!!!!
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.