DETROIT (Reuters) - A federal judge in Detroit on Thursday ordered the Bush administration to halt the National Security Agency's program of domestic eavesdropping, saying it violated the U.S. Constitution.Despite the clear facts of the case, I expect the SCOTUS to figure out some reason why the Constitution in fact says the exact opposite of what we all think it does.
The ruling was a setback for the Bush administration, which has defended the program as an essential tool in its war on terrorism.
Judge Anna Diggs Taylor said the controversial practice of warrantless wiretapping known as the "Terrorist Surveillance Program" violated free speech rights, protections against unreasonable searches and the constitutional check on the power of the presidency.
UPDATE: Reading Glenn Greenwald, I expect this will be what Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito, and Judge #5 use against the constitution:
Second, the court ruled that the plaintiffs have standing to challenge the legality of the NSA program even though they cannot prove they have been eavesdropped on, because they have suffered actual harm merely from knowing that the Government is eavesdropping.So if this case makes it through appeals and gets to the Supremes, they can simply decide that the plaintiffs didn't have standing, and dismiss the whole thing. Lovely.
Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, George Washington: Why does the Supreme Court hate our freedoms?
No comments:
Post a Comment