Replies

ndt: "If the U.S. person is talking to a known terrorist abroad, that would be sufficient evidence to get a FISA warrant."

"However, because of the President's constitutional duty to act for the United States in the field of foreign relations, and his inherent power to protect national security in the context of foreign affairs, we reaffirm what we held in United States v. Clay, supra, that the President may constitutionally authorize warrantless wiretaps for the purpose of gathering foreign intelligence."

--United States v. Brown, 484 F.2d 418, 426 (1973)

"We agree with the district court that the Executive Branch need not always obtain a warrant for foreign intelligence surveillance."

--U.S. v. Truong Dinh Hung, 629 F.2d 908, 913 (1980)

"Prior to the enactment of FISA, virtually every court that had addressed the issue had concluded that the President had the inherent power to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance to collect foreign intelligence information, and that such surveillances constituted an exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment."

--United States v. Duggan, 743 F.2d 59 (1984)

"The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent [constitutional] authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information."

--In re Sealed Case, 310, F3d. 717, 742 (2002)

2 points for good HTML sills and 2 points for creative quotes mining.

"We agree with the district court that the Executive Branch need not always obtain a warrant for foreign intelligence surveillance."

You left out what followed not one paragraph later..

"Balancing individual privacy and government needs, the Supreme Court concluded that the executive must seek a warrant before it undertakes domestic security surveillance.

"...the President did have inherent [constitutional] authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information"

It goes on to say ...

"The question before us is the reverse, does FISA amplify the President’s power by providing a mechanism that at least approaches a classic warrant and which therefore supports the government’s contention that FISA searches are constitutionally reasonable."

In other words, the president is still bound by the reasonableness clause. If the president were to conduct suvailance without a warrant he could be found to have violated the constitutional rights of the person spied upon. Note, "reasonable" does not refer to level of national threat, but to evidence of wrong doing. No evidence of wrong doing, no spying allowed.

"...the President may constitutionally authorize warrantless wiretaps for the purpose of gathering foreign intelligence."

Foreign intelligence yes, but if you bothered to read the sentence before that one you would see this.

"...in the area of domestic security, the President may not authorize electronic surveillance without some form of prior judicial approval."