If the wiretap ruling is overturned, is the Constitution/Democracy dead?

[Raydawg1234]

This is perhaps the most important ruling the Supreme Court of the United States will ever make. If judge Taylor's ruling is overturned, it will set a precedent that will in effect destroy the Constitution and everything it stands for. The Bill of Rights.....meaningless. Checks and balences.....gone. This will cement the power of the Imperial Presidency, and give Bush and his predecessors the leeway to break whatever law they want in the name of "national security."

We can only hope that the Supreme Court is made up of real patriots.

[Ninja Jordan]

1. What were the specifics of the ruling?

Did the court nullify the FISA/warrant system? Or simply rule that the president must use the FISA channel before engagin in wiretap operations?

[Raydawg1234]

3. It declared the wiretaping program unconstitutional, and ordered

that it be stopped.

[Ninja Jordan]

8. Wiretapping as a whole?

Because wiretapping has been used by law enforcement for decades. I doubt the ruling addressed that. The key legal question was whether the president could ignore the warrant requirements of the FISA court when engaging in electronic wiretap, or whether federal officers must petition the court for a warrant within 72 hours of the information gathering.

[Raydawg1234]

12. It applied to the warrantless part.

[Ninja Jordan]

15. Then yes, it would be quite depressing if this ruling is overturned.

nm

[acmejack]

25. Why don't read up on it instead of arguing about it?

[Ninja Jordan]

30. Arguing?

Check again buddy.

[Kagemusha]

4. The court ruled against no-warrant wiretapping.

FISA and the warrant system are obviously, wiretapping with a warrant.

For the rest, well.... do yourself a favor, consult this blog: http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/

Hope it helps. And it probably will.

[Ninja Jordan]

11. Thanks (nm)

[TomInTib]

6. Basically called on the bastards to follow the law.

The FISA business designed by Congress to keep the Exec from walking all over the Bill of Rights.

[Kagemusha]

14. Good summary, well said.

nt

[sutz12]

7. Here's a link

It's a pretty good read, for a legal document. ;)

http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/eGov/taylorpdf/06%2010204.pdf

I thought her arguments were cogent, to the point, and right on.

It pretty much states that the NSA wiretap program is illegal and unconstitutional. It also harms a specific group of people (mostly journalists and businessmen) by chilling relationships with overseas connections.

[w4rma]

28. Unsupervised/Warrentless wiretapping is unConstitutional.

That's the gist of the ruling.

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Very, Very, Very Unlikely

Five SCOTUS justices went out of their way, in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, to make it clear that the President cannot violate the Constitution through super powers of his own invention. Based on this and the 8-1 ruling in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, I'd be very surprised if fewer than 7 justices voted against Bush.

[Kagemusha]

5. Even if they say the legal reasoning is weak originally

they can just provide their own reasons why the decision is still right, if they want to. Thus making the ruling much stronger actually.

[Raydawg1234]

10. Well that makes me a little less worried. You know I just assume that

there are Bush cronies everywhere.

[MannyGoldstein]

16. Please Say a Little "Thank You" Prayer To Our Founders

There's a reason why the Judiciary is still functional despite the total breakdown of the Legislative and Executive branches - the Founders designed the Judiciary to be as self-interest-proof as possible.

Even Scalia seems to have brief flashes of lucidity, such as in Hamdi. Only Thomas is clearly totally out of his mind, although I'm a bit worried about Alito. We'll see...

[TomInTib]

9. It's already dead

just not quite buried.

If this ruling is overturned, I will be posting from Costa Rica.

[Hardrada]

13. Vaya con Dios

[Davis_X_Machina]

18. Died 12/12/2000. n/t

[Webster Green]

23. Indeed!

[jobycom]

17. We survived Dred Scott, Civil Rights Cases, and Plessy v Ferguson

We've been battered by Bush v Gore almost beyond recognition. But we just have to realize that we won't win them all, and that the forces of good have never won them all in the US. Democracy and the unique freedoms of the Constitution have never been perfectly applied. Jackson, Lincoln, Wilson, and Roosevelt, too name a few, all slammed the Constitution with an eight pound mall, and it survived.

What we have to do is fight every fight, never give up, and when the evil forces win a round, plot out our strategy to reclaim what we've lost. BushCo has hit the Constitution like Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, but the Gulf Coast will survive and rebuild, and so will the Constitution. Don't let the bastards win easily, and when they do win, let them know we are coming for them. They expect us to roll over and die. I live to disappoint them.

Vive la Libertie!

(but yeah, it will suck if it happens)

[Raydawg1234]

19. nicely said

:toast:

[mmonk]

35. The problem of course is that

we might not outlive an overturn of the decision as the remedy may come after some of us are gone. The other problem is past remedies are no guarantee to future remedy. I don't want to leave my offspring in a country I can't guarantee they will be free in.

[leftofthedial]

20. democracy, at least in this country, died on December 12, 2000

We will have to bring it back to life

[acmavm]

21. Oh yeah, we're screwed if it's overturned. It is a matter of whether or

not these thugs need a warrant to invade our privacy and violate our rights. To get a warrant (in the old days before bush**/cheney decided to subvert the Constitution and treasonously violate all our rights) required a little thing like a valid reason for the warrant.

Our 'democracy' is on life support right now. Giving this criminal administration free reign to violate the Constitution will pull the plug.

[grasswire]

22. you can join this fight today

The ACLU is the plaintiff, on behalf of the people. You (all) can become a member of the ACLU today and stand in solidarity with the organization as it fights the coming tyranny.

Go to http://www.aclu.org.

Membership starts at twenty bucks, but you can donate as little as five dollars to make a difference.

SOLIDARITY. Stand up, keep fighting, and give the ACLU the weight of another member.

I urge all DU-ers to do this now.

[izzie]

24. I think we have done this before. It is the same old battle.

It seems all Presidents want to have more power than what is good for them or us. If I recall our 'founders' said we would have to ALWAYS watch out for this. Face it it is never going to be a thing done but always in the works. The 'founders' them self had problems with it when one of them became President.

[kentuck]

26. I thought JudgeTaylor's ruling was going to appeals court ?

Not the Supreme Court.

And the appeals courts have been stacked by Republicans in recent years. Reportedly this is a very conservative court. It would be earth-shaking if they upheld Judge Taylor's ruling. Earth-shaking!

[mmonk]

27. Please help

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1942534

[annabanana]

29. You need another N. Carolingian!

An out of state letter won't impress.

[mmonk]

33. They print letters to the editor

from all over the world.

[ldf]

31. i don't know the mechanisms,

but i think the only recourse with a supreme court justice is impeachment. impeach every one that voted for outright, blatant, warrantless spying on the american people.

that should be the next step. they need to realize that there are some things that the american people will NOT tolerate.

it SHOULD have happened in 2000.

[Kickin_Donkey]

32. You're just being optimistic ...

it died 12/12/00.

[mmonk]

34. It would end our system of government

for my lifetime (I'm 50) but it could be re-established sometime in the future with different justices or it might not. Only time will tell if it is overturned and end up thus being the absolute end of checks and balances.