FISA judge says court might be disbanded

[quaoar]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/21/AR2005122102326.html

Judges on Surveillance Court To Be Briefed on Spy Program

By Carol D. Leonnig and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, December 22, 2005; Page A01

The presiding judge of a secret court that oversees government surveillance in espionage and terrorism cases is arranging a classified briefing for her fellow judges to address their concerns about the legality of President Bush's domestic spying program, according to several intelligence and government sources.

Several members of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court said in interviews that they want to know why the administration believed secretly listening in on telephone calls and reading e-mails of U.S. citizens without court authorization was legal. Some of the judges said they are particularly concerned that information gleaned from the president's eavesdropping program may have been improperly used to gain authorized wiretaps from their court.

U.S. Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, head of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, expects officials from NSA and the Justice Department to explain the warrantless spying. (AP)

< snip >

The judges could, depending on their level of satisfaction with the answers, demand that the Justice Department produce proof that previous wiretaps were not tainted, according to government officials knowledgeable about the FISA court. Warrants obtained through secret surveillance could be thrown into question. One judge, speaking on the condition of anonymity, also said members could suggest disbanding the court in light of the president's suggestion that he has the power to bypass the court.

[Mojorabbit]

1. He has pissed off the judiciary now

I think this will be a turning point in the courts for everything he tries to get from here on out

[Supersedeas]

35. Does the King really care?

[ThoughtCriminal]

2. Isn't that kind of like the the police saying

Oh, they robbed the bank despite our existance, we should disband?

[quaoar]

4. No

The FISA court was set up for one purpose only -- to issue warrants for wiretaps. If Bush is bypassing them, what's the need for the court?

[howmad1]

8. And if the court is not needed,.......

......better stop posting on DU. Otherwise, your ass will belong to the FBI,NSA,CIA, etc. etc. etc. :mad:

[ThoughtCriminal]

11. Might as well get rid of that pesky 4th Amendment

Because if they're bypassing it, it's not needed?

[quaoar]

12. Bush has pissed all over it

If Congress doesn't hold him accountable, does the Fourth Amendment mean anything anymore?

[tavalon]

15. Um,

because now that it has come out, we can force him to go through the FISA court. If there is no FISA court to go to, then he will de facto do it without any oversight.

It sounds a bit like a childish temper tantrum on their part.

[tblue37]

20. I think the point is the publicity.

By noisily disbanding this court, they would force the MSM and the public to pay attention to something other than the finale of Survivor or Britney's marital woes.

Just like when the judge resigned in disgust. It makes the news. It also signals real conservatives (there are still a few) that this has really gone too far.

[Mr Rabble]

40. Is Britney's marriage in trouble?

Oh the humanity!:sarcasm:

[formercia]

18. By disbanding the Court, intercepts would be illegal

since the administration would not be able to get a warrant.

[YourBrother]

28. yes, its a big problem

the numbers of good people "resigning" from top positions is alarming, what we need is the good guys still in place, not dissappearing or suiciding themselves

the amount of people resigning over these issues indicates to me that exterior/interior pressure has been put on these people, and that they have decided there is nothing they can do about it so might aswell take their pot of gold and run for the hills

when is someone going to take a stand?

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

3. Makes sense as a protest, and as an acknowledgement that

while legally they are supposed to have the authority, der fuhrer is acting as if they don't exist, so why bother?

Plus if * has been using information found through illegal wiretaps as a basis to justify wiretaps submitted to the FISA court, then they are really being used in this ridiculous con game.

[stepnw1f]

5. Kickity Kick!!!

[Bozita]

6. Are we living through another "Saturday Night Massacre"?

[SummerGrace]

9. Gestapo

On February 10, 1936, the Nazi Reichstag passed the 'Gestapo Law' which included the following paragraph: "Neither the instructions nor the affairs of the Gestapo will be open to review by the administrative courts."

This meant the Gestapo was now above the law and there could be no legal appeal regarding anything it did.

Indeed, the Gestapo became a law unto itself. It was entirely possible for someone to be arrested, interrogated and sent to a concentration camp for incarceration or summary execution, without any outside legal procedure.

Justice in Hitler's Germany was completely arbitrary, depending on the whim of the man in power, the man who had you in his grip. The legal policy as proclaimed by Hitler in 1938 was: "All means, even if they are not in conformity with existing laws and precedents, are legal if they subserve the will of the Führer."
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/triumph/tr-gestapo.htm

[tblue37]

21. Oh, but it is just "outrageous" when anyone compares

these fascists to Nazis!

[Liberty Belle]

7. KICK!

[AtomicKitten]

10. Holy shit, this is big!!

Wow. What a statement that would make.

[burrowowl]

13. KICK!

Will this wake up the SHEEPLE!

[democrank]

14. Seems like a serious development.

Let Bush explain to these folks why he`s above the law.

[nicknameless]

16. But if they disbanded, to whom would * have to answer?

Wouldn't that just give him more leeway to do whatever he wanted?
As long as the FISA Court exists, at least that's one check on executive power.
(Okay, not much of one, but it's better than nothing.)

[lebkuchen]

17. Would the FISA's disbanding add to the argument of impeachment?

The judges would be acknowledging that Bush has circumvented their purpose, usurp-ting surveillance powers for himself thereby undermining the concept of "checks and balances."

[nicknameless]

19. How? We need every single check we can get on executive power.

If they disbanded, *we* lose -- not bush.
He violated Federal laws with his warrantless-surveillance. FISA disbanding wouldn't be more evidence that * has broken the law.
We got all of the evidence we needed when he TOLD us that's what he was doing.

[lebkuchen]

24. FISA isn't a *check*; otherwise, we wouldn't be surveilled right now

What service does the FISA provide if Bush isn't going to abide by the laws which put the FISA in place?

I believe that is the point the judges may be making should they disband.

[nicknameless]

30. Huh? Of course it's a check. He was supposed to get their approval --

That's the definition of a check!

It's one that wasn't allowed to function when * didn't get their approval first. But that doesn't make it any less of a check.

What service does FISA provide? A judicial check on the executive branch. Bush broke the law.

ThoughtCriminal's analogy is correct. It's like saying that we should get rid of the police if people commit crimes. If people are still committing crimes, what service are police providing?
... That just doesn't make sense.

[quaoar]

32. It would be a good analogy

if people were committing crimes and the mayor told the police that they cannot arrest anyone. The police would then wonder what the hell they are wasting their time for.

[nicknameless]

37. Nope. Your analogy makes the mayor and the criminals the same people.

In this case, the mayor *is* the criminal.

This article was a great find, thanks for posting it. But that justice's quote was just weird.

[lebkuchen]

33. If FISA continued its job as always, no harm, no foul,

Bush would do the same. The status quo would be maintained. FISA can pretend it's a check on the executive branch, and Bush can pretend he's abiding by that check, proclaiming to the public that he wouldn't surveille w/o judicial approval, but then do it anyway, under the pretense of obeying a law that FISA doesn't really care about trying to enforce.

Or FISA could care about trying to enforce the law and discuss what options it has in terms of getting Bush to comply w/its authority while punishing him for past transgressions. Is that within FISA's sphere of influence? If not, then the judges should revolt. Some of them are doing that now.

[nicknameless]

38. What on earth are you talking about?!

"If FISA continued its job as always, no harm, no foul, Bush would do the same."

That makes no sense, whatsoever.
FISA was an existing court. Bush was required by law to get warrants from them prior to any surveillance.
He didn't do that. He broke the law.

The FISA has no authority to "enforce the law" or "punish Bush".

When crime increases, you redouble your efforts, you don't disband the police force.
Checks on executive power need to increase -- not decrease.

[nicknameless]

22. Another thing to keep in mind is if the FISA Court were disbanded,

how much coverage would it get in the reich-wing media? Just one more event swept under the rug.

[robbedvoter]

23. Always one good soldier - reporters always find him:

"But Judge Malcolm Howard of eastern North Carolina said he tends to think the terrorist threat to the United States is so grave that the president should use every tool available and every ounce of executive power to combat it."

[Neil Lisst]

25. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

When these judges are briefed on what has been done, I predict some will refer the matter to the Attorney General's office for prosecution.

This required a fairly systematic scheme of fraud on these courts for four years. Words cannot express how angry judges get - especially federal judges appointed for life - when they find out a party or attorney has willfully deceived them. Whoever the attorneys are that represented the government will be asked by the judges to justify themselves, and if they don't, it will be jail time for contempt.

I think this is going to be the scandal that brings the administration down, not the Plame thing.

[Jim__]

26. Make them prove their requests weren't tainted.

That's great. Now, it seems to me that the judges are going to be a lot tougher on issuing their warrants. That is, bush has endangered national security by threatening the balance of power in the US.

[Neil Lisst]

27. You have nailed it.

Bush has hurt national security with this scheme.

They only turned down 1 out of every 1000, and they can be asked retroactively.

How low can the bar get? It's already implanted into the floor.

[xchrom]

29. i guess they'll be spying on the judges of fisa now.

[BR_Parkway]

31. Are we gonna hear 'activist judges' again? Seems like they will

be less likely to issue warrants now that ShrubCo tried to go around them - which means that once again, this (mis)administration is actually harming our national security for their own politics and corruption.

[greiner3]

34. Maybe b*** could outsource it next time.

:sarcasm:

[EVDebs]

36. They've still got 4 yrs worth of illegal warrants to review !

No wonder they're P.O.ed. The backlog will be overwhelming. Bush incompetence strikes again !

[cry baby]

39. Why do they hate America? eom