Warrantless Wiretapping Ruled Unconstitutional

[Red Harvest]

A U.S. District Court judge has ruled the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program unconstitutional. She has ordered a halt to the program. Of course, this will be appealed and eventually the Supreme Court will take a look at it. The Administrations recent record in the courts has been less than stellar...

Link

DETROIT - A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government’s warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency’s program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy as well as the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution.

[removeduser_426582376423734]

Damn straight. What counts as warrantless?

[invictus]

Finally someone with enough common sense to say no. -Leon
EDIT: By warrentless they tend to mean without a court order or judge approval. They can simply do it out of a whim or just because they feel like it without any actual suspicion.(sp)

[ENSAIS]

Finally someone with enough common sense to say no. -Leon
EDIT: By warrentless they tend to mean without a court order or judge approval. They can simply do it out of a whim or just because they feel like it without any actual suspicion.(sp)

Leon, are you aware that "warrantless" "spying" "on a whim" by the NSA caught chatter that about the Brooklyn Bridge that may have stopped THIS http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,208462,00.html
plot.

No one knows for sure if the warrantless data mining was the key... but my point is that getting rid of this tool out of hand is irresponsible.

Answer this for me, please:

How can we get a warrant from a Court about specific individuals or plots when we don't first know what specifically we are looking for without mining for data? Is there ANY place for data mining? Do you draw the line so close that just because the calls involve someone in the US we must first have a warrant?

If so, your policy AND your results will likely be much less successful than the Bush administration's-- which so far is ZERO successful terrorist attacks on the homeland since declaring war on us on 9-11.

Just my 2 cents. I feel strongly about the necessity of programs like this that involve using any tool at our disposal. We should have done more to prevent 9-11. Now that we know we are a target, there is no furhter excuse.

I hope none of my comments are taken as offensive just to be offensive. I mean only to foward the debate, though I feel strongly about this topic.

ENSAIS

[mongoose]

Leon, are you aware that "warrantless" "spying" "on a whim" by the NSA caught chatter that about the Brooklyn Bridge that may have stopped THIS http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,208462,00.html
plot.

No one knows for sure if the warrantless data mining was the key... but my point is that getting rid of this tool out of hand is irresponsible.

Pull your head out of the sand. They can seek warrants AFTER THE FACT.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Pull your head out of the sand. They can seek warrants AFTER THE FACT.

Whos head is in the sand? So they should get the warrant after the crime has been commited and thousands are dead?

[mongoose]

Whos head is in the sand? So they should get the warrant after the crime has been commited and thousands are ?

Ummm...After the fact means that they do the wire tapping and than they have to get a warrant...

ENASIS

You seem to be asserting that the NSA cannot function without data mining. Why? I don't really see anyreason why every single called needs to be listend to.

[Red Harvest]

Whos head is in the sand? So they should get the warrant after the crime has been commited and thousands are dead?

Your head isn't in the sand...but it appears to be planted somewhere more fragrant judging by that erroneous statement. The warrant requirement is after the tap, not after a crime. This gives the flexibility to actually act on something when they have probable cause, then seek the warrant later when convenient.

Again, there has been NO DEMONSTRATION THAT THIS ACTUALLY LIMITS THE PREZ's CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS. And there has been NO DEMONSTRATION THAT THIS ACTUALLY LIMITS THE WAR ON TERROR. There has been a lot of smoke blowing from the Whitehouse, but they still have not provided any proof at all that their claims are founded.

[ENSAIS]

Good Mongoose, sir, a bit of respect please.

The only sand my head was in was foreign sand...

Now please explain how the NSA program can work at all if you cannot data mine (that is, listen in on phone calls without knowing WHAT it is you are looking for (otherwise you would get the warrant for it ASAP))...

my point is that in this situation even a warrant 72 hours AFTER THE FACT does not authorize the whole data mining in general if this judge is correct that it is unconstitutional. Otherwise one has 72 hours to shut down the whole NSA program or get a new warrant for each piece of info... Do you see how it is just unworkable? Either data mining on joint US/foreign calls is within the war-fighting powers of the President or not. Otherwise there is no workable way to do this, as a warrant can be obtained for specific info ---but the specific info itself would not have been obtained (as there was no warrant to authorize looking for it...)


My vote is for congress to specifically authorize wiretapping for US to foreign and Foreign to US calls. There is enough support among the US population and Congress to do so. Constitutional crisis averted.

And hopefully my head is now retracted from the "sand" *go away memories of damn sand in my mouth for 8 mo!*
ENSAIS

[AMERICARULES]

NOOOO. This is bad. This program played a critical role in foiling the Brooklyn Bridge bomb plot and not having it removes a big weapn on the war on terror

[Miraj]

This program played a critical role in foiling the Brooklyn Bridge bomb plot and not having it removes a big weapn on the war on terror

Could you elaborate on the Brooklyn Bridge bomb plot? Can you give me some details on the perpetrators and the heaps of evidence against them? And while you're at it can you inform me of the current status of the suspects?

[Red Harvest]

NOOOO. This is bad. This program played a critical role in foiling the Brooklyn Bridge bomb plot and not having it removes a big weapn on the war on terror

That is nonsense. Wiretapping is still allowed and the warrant can be issued AFTER THE FACT. I've not seen any creditable information that this would in anyway tie their hands on the WOT. No, what it does is prevent ABUSES because it requires justification/review.

[invictus]

War on terror is a load of ****. Honestly i dont even think the government cares. Even if they somehow did, not liek they can actually stop "terrorists". If they could we would have stopped 9/11, we would be out of Iraq and Afghan. -Leon

[Mikelus Trento]

War on terror is a load of ****. Honestly i dont even think the government cares. Even if they somehow did, not liek they can actually stop "terrorists". If they could we would have stopped 9/11, we would be out of Iraq and Afghan. -Leon

Do you think your sentiment is shared by all the people who would have been on jets blown up over the Atlantic?

Do you think the actual beginning of the "War on Terror" began before 9/11? Or perhaps that that was indeed the time when more forceful measures became necessary?

[imb39]

And what Brooklyn Bridge bomb plot is that? I presume you are being serious...

The War on Terror is what it is - an oxymoron.

[AMERICARULES]

wikipedia.org Brooklyn Bridge, an al-qaeda associate is now in jail on a 20 year sentence. Pretty serious to me. To dismiss this particular incident as nothing big would be inconceivable to me.

[Perikles]

I suppose Wiretapping does help police and intelligence foil terror/crimanal gangs but I wouldn't want someone listening in on my conversations...

[AMERICARULES]

I suppose Wiretapping does help police and intelligence foil terror/crimanal gangs but I wouldn't want someone listening in on my conversations...

But the program that was most effective originally only monitored calls to outside the USA, so most of your conversations probably would not be monitored.

[Eric]

I suppose Wiretapping does help police and intelligence foil terror/crimanal gangs but I wouldn't want someone listening in on my conversations...

Yeah that would be kinda creepy, and uncomfortable. I definetely wouldn't want some government weirdos listening in on my most intimate of intimate phone conversations with my girlfriend, that would be embarrasing

[conon394]

AMERICARULES

Iyman Faris seems not to have been captured because of the warrant less wiretapping.

Around the beginning of 2006 (the time the Director of the FBI was testifying about how much crap information he was getting from the NSA…) Several papers all reported that their sources indicated that the warrant less NSA program had not provided any evidence for arresting Iyman Faris (“SPY AGENCY DATA AFTER SEPT. 11 LED F.B.I. TO DEAD ENDS” NY Times January 17, 2006).

It's ridiculous that the NSA should have to be babysit by some court if it feels the need to monitor an international phone call because our nation's security is at stake

Are you aware of just how compliant the FISA court has been?

http://www.epic.org/privacy/wiretap/...isa_stats.html

Wow! 4 out of thousands and thousands… beyond that it is not as if the government does not already have the authority to tap first and then go to the FISA. What a road block for national security.