Posted on 08/21/2006 4:36:16 AM PDT by Laverne
There is poor reasoning, and then there is head-spinningly, jaw-droppingly poor reasoning. U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor's angry 44-page ruling against NSA terrorism surveillance is the latter, and constitutes little more than a political stunt, with ever-so-helpful declarations like "There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution." The American Civil Liberties Union forum-shopped this lawsuit, handed it to a reliably left-liberal Jimmy Carter appointee in Detroit and got its desired result.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
I wonder how many actual federally-usurped powers this Carterite has voted to uphold over the years? Liberals whine about the executive assuming powers to fight enemies but have no problem with widespread federal powers when it suits their agenda.
"I wouldn't accept this utterly unsupported, constitutionally and logically bankrupt collection of musings from a first-year law student, much less a new lawyer at my firm," wrote Brian Cunningham, a lawyer who served under both the Clinton and Bush administrations.Ouch.
Just can't help wondering if that all includes "emanations" and "penumbras"...
Yes, I was thinking that as well. I'm glad to see that the legal community, mostly, is trashing the judge's decision. I believe there is a hearing scheduled on 7 September for the appeal.
"Logical Poverty" That one will be stored in my comeback
file.
The Dems/MSM take on the ruling: Fake but accurate.
(Enter, Stage Right, the AG)
Maybe you’d like terrorists in our streets
But I don’t want a 9/11 repeat
Maybe you’d throw away a tapped phone call,
But the smart money says your decision’s gonna fall
Oh little girl
Chorus
In this case, right from the start
“Standing” is a charming term of art
And if you feel like doubtin’ me
’Mongst all this commotion,
I’ve made a new trial motion
Maybe you think Hezbollah runs Motown
Since you owe your job to that Carter clown.
Maybe you think this isn’t a good tool,
And so it makes you want to break the rules
Oh little girl
Chorus: In this case, experts want no part
Your reasoning's gonna fall apart
And if you feel like doubtin’ me
’Mongst all this commotion,
I’ve made a new trial motion
So, if you feel like doubtin’ me
With no compunction,
I sought out an injunction.
Yes, it's the New Motown sound---doubtless, this case is destined for (giggle)the Supremes.
Gosh, this stuff just writes itself...
See Post 11 - Another "hit" to send to your lawyer friends. I can't stop this.
Since there are no powers not created by the Constitution, ya just gotta wonder where the judiciary got the authority to overturn actions of the executive.
Actually, what I can find constitutionally suspect is our acceptance of a process that allows a lower court judge to declare acts of Congress and the President "unconstitutional."
The 3 branches of the government are not some nameless Legislative, Executive, and Judicial....they are Congress, The President, and the Supreme Court.
Can we assume that a 3rd tier congressional liason office can pass national legislation just because it's attached by some umbilical cord to Congress? ("Hi, JQ Taxpayer, but we regret to inform you that the "Policy and Plans Division of the Congressional Budget Office" has determined we need more money so the staff voted to increase TAXES on every single American by a vote of 7-5.") The people would rise in revolt over such a thing.
District and Appeals Courts must be put in their place.
Congress & the President should remove from them any right to rule on the acts of Congress or the President. That should be a prerogative ONLY of the Supreme Court.
I was thinking the same thing this weekend, after watching Clooney's pathetic "Syriana" movie.
The libs created this federal monster despite conservative warnings. They had no problems surrendering our civil liberties and privacy when it came to taxing the masses to feed the monster, assigning everyone in the country a number for their Ponzi retirement scheme, or decimating the greatest healthcare system in the world by giving the government a major role. They tax and regulate business to death, and then are shocked that business leaders get involved in governance. Suddenly, after 50 years of deficit spending, now that they're out of power, balancing the budget is important.
Their whining is pathetic. They made the monster, and even today they resist any attempt to dismantle it. If the government ever turns on the people, or gets taken over by a radical executive, as sad as that may be, the libs will deserve everything they get. And, since they won't be armed, they'll not be able to do anything about it.
It just shows how stupid and desperate the liberal idiots at the ACLU are. It also points out the kind of judges you get when you have a retard president like Peanuts Carter.
"Can we assume that a 3rd tier congressional liason office can pass national legislation just because it's attached by some umbilical cord to Congress? ("Hi, JQ Taxpayer, but we regret to inform you that the "Policy and Plans Division of the Congressional Budget Office" has determined we need more money so the staff voted to increase TAXES on every single American by a vote of 7-5.") The people would rise in revolt over such a thing."
Actually, yes...if you do not think so ask yourself, who writes all those regulations that can send folk to the poor house, regulate you property into worthless state, or take your property away....regulators in a host of minor bureaus and offices.
Faceless bureaucrats have as much or more power than do obscure judges for we can find and demonize specific hack judges....try that with the EPA.
By the same token, some tier 3 judge shouldn't be able to overrule the actions of a tier one branch of government. Why not just overrule the Supreme Court?
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.