Dick Cheney is wrong and Rand Paul is right.
Paul believes in the Constitution’s provision that a warrant be issued specifically detailing the wwwwwh’s of a search.
I see the Constitution as our guiding document, and if Cheney or anyone wants it changed, then they are free to pursue an amendment. The “Fisa” court is an attempt to amend the constitution by legislative vote IF it’s given ANY authority to short-circuit that constitutional requirement.
We don’t have secret courts issuing secret, rushed warrants in the Constitution. Anything in the Bill of Rights should be held to a HIGHER standard and not to a lower one.
Some say this makes us vulnerable to terrorists. I disagree. If they’ve only found a terrorist plan by painstaking research or field work, then the extra few days to do this properly is no impediment.
If they have discovered an act to be carried out against the US, then the President is the Commander in Chief, and he has the authority to make immediate strikes to protect our security.
The Fourth Amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[71]
I don’t find the part that says warrants need to be issued in every case. The Constitution protects us from unreasonable searches and directs actions when a warrant is issued. But it doesn’t order a warrant for searches.
Am I reading this wrong? If so, how?
I agree.