Sunday, June 22, 2008
A Guide to the New FISA Bill, Part II
Second, more importantly, the pending legislation focuses only on the target’s location (or the government’s reasonable belief about his location) not his status or conduct as a terrorist or agent of a foreign power.
When this in significant fashion affects "the people," it seems to be of particular 4A concern especially in the 21st Century international communications world.
It might not be immediately relevent, but four justices in particular think citizenship is key when dealing with habeas. Locale isn't the deciding factor. Why not other constitutional rights?
Not that unlimited power to wiretap others doesn't concern me. But, when "the people" of the United States are involved in particular, some status/conduct link should be present.
I appreciate as well the explanation of the details of this legislation. Immunity rankles, but it isn't the only matter of concern. As with the rush job last time, the short time allowed to understand this bill before voting is atrocious.
The fact experts can't quite get a handle of things yet is sooo telling.
Is there some reason you call the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program the "terrorist surveillance program"? Why prefer a sales slogan to an accurate term?
Is there some reason you don't mention that the administration is proceeding with massive infrastructure for surveillance of domestic communication, regardless of law, legislature, or courts?
Is there some reason you don't mention that the warrantless wiretapping program that has been revealed, and attempted to be justified and posthoc blessed as legal, is far from the whole of the program?
the immunity is a craw sticker imo .. why isn't it barred under say ex post facto principles .. [IANAL .. be patient with me]
and all this seems somewhat well and fine .. but what's to happen if as in Apr. 2007 a FISA judege makes another decision the gov't can't "tolerate" ..
that to me is the issue .. that the executive branch .. the keeper of the "Take Care" clause finds rulings of law that not only does it refuse to "take care" of ..but simply "can't tolerate" ..
the executive cannot claim a right to refuse to follow the rule of law .. it's a direct violation of their charge of office ...
One of the key unanswered questions is whether this bill would authorize wholesale interception and recording of communications to and from the US or whether it would only permit particularized (albeit very extensive) interception of the communications of selected individuals. The answer to this question turns in part on the meaning of "targeting." I have posed this question at length in a blog at the CDT site, http://blog.cdt.org/2008/06/25/does-targeting-authorize-the-vacuum-cleaner/ My comment accepts and builds on David Kris' analysis. I welcome comments either at the CDT site or here.
few minutes I read the Guide to New FISA Bill part I and this part is so good too, as good as taking some Sildenafil thanks for sharing!
On my way home I heard on the radio about this blog so I hooked up immediately, and then I ran across a blog where I had the chance to buy some Viagra Online.Post a Comment