The FISA Court of Appeals ruled specifically that it didn't violate the law. The ACLU asked the Supreme Court to review the decision. They declined.
Your rant is the DNC talking points and ignores the court rulings.
I knew about (and have read) the FISA opinion, but I didn't know that the Supreme Court declined review. Thanks for posting this information.
Your rant is the DNC talking points and ignores the court rulings.
The court case in question (In re: Sealed Case 002-01) quite simply isn't about warrantless searches being legal outside FISA, and no ruling was made on that subject. The comment made (again, in dicta) pointed out the question they decided was the *reverse* of that.
We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President’s constitutional power.
Taking something 'for granted', and 'assuming' something to be so, isn't 'ruling specifically' by a long shot, now, is it?
If there's another case that is actually on point, by all means provide it.
--R.