Wednesday, December 21, 2005
Spygate?
This should be old news to most, but I'm putting this post together in an effort to share some of the various perspectives on the issue.
The old news: President Bush authorized the National Security Administration to monitor the telephone calls and e-mails of people within the United States. The New York Times reported this nearly a week ago. The President personally approved the eavesdropping at least three dozen times. Hundreds, and possibly thousands, of Americans have had their conversations listed to and their messages read by government agents.
Why this is news: President Bush may have broken the law. As the Washington Post reports, Bush signed an order in 2002 that could make a legal justification for the secret eavesdropping. That order, however, violates at least the spirit of a number of laws already on the books. One such law created the FISA courts, named for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that established them. Congress passed the FISA in 1978 to set rules for spying on Americans under the guise of national security. As the Los Angeles Times reported, Bush's action likely violates at least the FISA.
A civics lesson: the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects the American people from this kind of activity. It requires the government to seek a warrant before conducting this kind of eavesdropping. The FISA court was set up to allow the executive branch to obtain such warrants without public court proceedings (which, in my opinion, is also illegal; but that's another blog post). The FISA court even allows the government to seek its warrants after the spying is underway. President Bush completely bypassed the FISA court. He sought no warrant. As reported by the Los Angeles Times, the Supreme Court has previously frowned on such activity.
The defense: the White House claims that Bush gets the power to continue the NSA eavesdropping from three sources: 1) the so-called war on terror grants him extraordinary wartime powers authorized by the Constitution; 2) the Congressional order authorizing the President to avenge the 9/11/2001 attacks ; and 3) since a handful Congressional leaders were alerted to the NSA's actions, they have Congressional approval.
The fallout: many members of Congress, of both houses and parties, are expressing outrage at the President's action. As reported by the Los Angeles Times, many are calling for full investigations into the matter. Some particularly vocal folks on the far left are beginning to call for Bush's impeachment (presuming, of course, that the spying was illegal). As this is written, Washington is reeling from the surprise resignation of a FISA court judge. As the Associated Press reports, that judge is resigning to protest Bush's action.
This is an issue that will not quickly fade. I will update the blog as I see fit.
The old news: President Bush authorized the National Security Administration to monitor the telephone calls and e-mails of people within the United States. The New York Times reported this nearly a week ago. The President personally approved the eavesdropping at least three dozen times. Hundreds, and possibly thousands, of Americans have had their conversations listed to and their messages read by government agents.
Why this is news: President Bush may have broken the law. As the Washington Post reports, Bush signed an order in 2002 that could make a legal justification for the secret eavesdropping. That order, however, violates at least the spirit of a number of laws already on the books. One such law created the FISA courts, named for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that established them. Congress passed the FISA in 1978 to set rules for spying on Americans under the guise of national security. As the Los Angeles Times reported, Bush's action likely violates at least the FISA.
A civics lesson: the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects the American people from this kind of activity. It requires the government to seek a warrant before conducting this kind of eavesdropping. The FISA court was set up to allow the executive branch to obtain such warrants without public court proceedings (which, in my opinion, is also illegal; but that's another blog post). The FISA court even allows the government to seek its warrants after the spying is underway. President Bush completely bypassed the FISA court. He sought no warrant. As reported by the Los Angeles Times, the Supreme Court has previously frowned on such activity.
The defense: the White House claims that Bush gets the power to continue the NSA eavesdropping from three sources: 1) the so-called war on terror grants him extraordinary wartime powers authorized by the Constitution; 2) the Congressional order authorizing the President to avenge the 9/11/2001 attacks ; and 3) since a handful Congressional leaders were alerted to the NSA's actions, they have Congressional approval.
The fallout: many members of Congress, of both houses and parties, are expressing outrage at the President's action. As reported by the Los Angeles Times, many are calling for full investigations into the matter. Some particularly vocal folks on the far left are beginning to call for Bush's impeachment (presuming, of course, that the spying was illegal). As this is written, Washington is reeling from the surprise resignation of a FISA court judge. As the Associated Press reports, that judge is resigning to protest Bush's action.
This is an issue that will not quickly fade. I will update the blog as I see fit.
