[GraceG]

I still don’t “get” how any law can trump the First Amendment.

Must be nice living in the la la land of actually beleiving the potiticians actually belive in following the constitution......

The constitution is only a problem for lawmakers when smeone brings a case to the supremers and only then it is a 50/50 crapshoot it would be turned over due to being unconstitutional...

[Dalberg-Acton]

Like this one:

United States v. Lopez (93-1260), 514 U.S. 549 (1995), limiting Congressional authority under the Commerce Clause.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

I think we have a stark choice: either we have to allow the government to collect, scan, and analyze all electronic and voice traffic or we have to tolerate a few successful terrorist attacks on US soil.

The American people should be consulted in some formal way. For example, the congress could bring up a law to specifically reinforce the concept that we are innocent until proven guilty and that therefore no electronic communication can be collected, scanned, or analyzed until after the submission of a valid warrant.

The congress should make it clear to the people that this could allow some terrorists to successfully communicate with each other to conduct a terrorist attack.

The people can then tell their congressmen which way they would prefer they vote.

We will then know if we are a nation of quivering sheep who are OK living in a police state, or if we are still a nation of men and women who are willing to accept the occasional pitfalls of a free and open society.