HUGELY distinguishable! I figure there is terrirotry between FISA and what the President is doing, and as even Jean Harman says, either the law has to change (not a bad idea), or some other rationale needs to be developed lest the government encroach on the people's right under the 4th. It's a sticky issue, but Congress can address it. RIght now they are playing politics with it, and it's going to be a loser for them at that level.
It's a very serious matter, but I really disresepct the fact that the DEMs are trying to flesh the issue out in this venue. Sure, discuss the process and make sure the judge can see arguments on both sides, then get on.
Others have hit on this, and what the DEMs are doing is using this venue for what they think will be political advantage. I'm convinced Alito will balance the rights of the people and the powers of the branches of government quite well.
Alito - admits this is an awesome isuue, sometimes even not justiciable. Alito is giving answers that are so good and so forthcoming - awesome, just awesome.
And Feingold admits this issue is really outside the bounds of this hearing. Russ, if it's not justiciable, all it means is "it's up to Congress and the President to set the boundary." I doubt that will be the case where an individual has a personal 4th amendment claim, BTW.
If its true that the eavesdropping was done to overseas targets, then I think it doesn't violate FISA, and the Court doesn't have to define the President's wartime powers, which I'm sure it would hate to do.
Gotta get some work done now!