Judge strikes down the warrantless eavesdropping program | McClatchy Washington Bureau

×
Sign In
Sign In
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Contact Us
    • Newsletters
    • Subscriber Services

    • All White House
    • Russia
    • All Congress
    • Budget
    • All Justice
    • Supreme Court
    • DOJ
    • Criminal Justice
    • All Elections
    • Campaigns
    • Midterms
    • The Influencer Series
    • All Policy
    • National Security
    • Guantanamo
    • Environment
    • Climate
    • Energy
    • Water Rights
    • Guns
    • Poverty
    • Health Care
    • Immigration
    • Trade
    • Civil Rights
    • Agriculture
    • Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • All Nation & World
    • National
    • Regional
    • The East
    • The West
    • The Midwest
    • The South
    • World
    • Diplomacy
    • Latin America
    • Investigations
  • Podcasts
    • All Opinion
    • Political Cartoons

  • Our Newsrooms

You have viewed all your free articles this month

Subscribe

Or subscribe with your Google account and let Google manage your subscription.

Latest News

Judge strikes down the warrantless eavesdropping program

Ron Hutcheson and Margaret Talev - McClatchy Newspapers

August 17, 2006 03:00 AM

WASHINGTON—In a scathing rebuke, a federal judge ruled Thursday that the Bush administration's warrantless eavesdropping program is unconstitutional and should be shut down, but legal scholars said the administration has a good chance of reversing the decision on appeal.

"There are no hereditary kings in America and no power not created by the Constitution," U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor of Detroit said in a 43-page opinion blasting the program.

Taylor said that the program, which President Bush secretly approved after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, violated the rights of free speech and privacy and went far beyond the president's authority. Administration officials say the surveillance program targets telephone calls and e-mails between the United States and suspected terrorists overseas.

The Justice Department immediately appealed the ruling, and all the parties agreed that the Bush administration is free to keep eavesdropping without warrants pending the Sept. 7 appeals-court hearing.

While the ruling was a clear victory for Bush's critics, it didn't end the legal battle over the government's secret eavesdropping. Legal scholars said the administration had a good chance of winning its appeal to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, which handles cases from Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee.

"This isn't the definitive word," said Bruce Fein, a Washington lawyer who agreed with Taylor's conclusions. "This is going to the 6th Circuit. If the 6th Circuit goes against the government, it's going to the Supreme Court."

Carl Tobias, a constitutional scholar at the University of Richmond's law school, said the 6th Circuit tended to be sympathetic to the government's national-security concerns.

"There are more judges on that court who come down on the national security end of the spectrum than the civil liberties end," he said. "The majority probably would reverse this decision."

Administration officials suggested that the ruling, if it stands, will increase the risk of a terrorist attack.

"We couldn't disagree more with this opinion," White House spokesman Tony Snow said in a statement. "The whole point is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks before they can be carried out. That's what the American people expect from their government."

Snow noted that the ruling came a week after the alleged aircraft-bombing plot in London offered "a stark reminder that terrorists are still plotting to attack our country."

Government lawyers called the surveillance program "a critical tool" in the war on terrorism and "an early warning system" against attacks.

"We're going to do everything that we can in the courts to allow this program to continue," Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the Detroit lawsuit on behalf of plaintiffs, called the decision "a landmark victory against the abuse of power that has become the hallmark of the Bush administration."

The ACLU sued on behalf of a group of journalists, lawyers and researchers, including several from Detroit, who suspected that government eavesdroppers had targeted their international calls.

Bush's decision to establish the warrantless surveillance program lets government agents bypass the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which requires court approval for domestic surveillance.

The law, enacted in 1978 in response to illegal wiretaps during the Nixon administration, includes emergency provisions that let investigators seek court approval up to 72 hours after the surveillance starts. Bush and his advisers say the law is too cumbersome when dealing with possible terrorist attacks.

The president contends that his constitutional power as commander in chief and the congressional resolution authorizing the use of military force against terrorists empowered him to establish the eavesdropping program. The New York Times revealed the secret surveillance late last year.

Taylor, a liberal Democrat whom President Jimmy Carter appointed to the court, concluded that Bush had overstepped his authority. She also rejected the government's argument that the case should be tossed out to avoid the risk of exposing government secrets.

"Plaintiffs have prevailed, and the public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution," she wrote.

The ruling complicates efforts in Congress to come up with a compromise that could satisfy both sides in the dispute. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., is pushing legislation that's intended to put the surveillance program under the jurisdiction of a special court established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Democrats blocked a vote on Specter's bill before the August recess, saying it wouldn't guarantee sufficient court oversight. They appeared unlikely to back down now that a federal judge essentially has endorsed their views.

"We can and should wiretap terrorists under the current FISA law," Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said after Taylor's ruling. "The problem has been the Bush-Cheney administration's insistence on doing it illegally, without checks and balances to prevent abusing the rights of Americans."

———

(c) 2006, McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

Need to map

Read Next

Latest News

No job? No salary? You can still get $20,000 for ‘green’ home improvements. But beware

By Kevin G. Hall

December 29, 2018 08:00 AM

A program called PACE makes it possible for people with equity in their homes to get easy money for clean energy improvements, regardless of income. But some warn this can lead to financial hardship, even foreclosure.

KEEP READING

MORE LATEST NEWS

Latest News

Trump administration aims to stop professional baseball deal with Cuba

December 29, 2018 02:46 PM

Congress

’I’m not a softy by any means,’ Clyburn says as he prepares to help lead Democrats

December 28, 2018 09:29 AM

Courts & Crime

Trump will have to nominate 9th Circuit judges all over again in 2019

December 28, 2018 03:00 AM

Congress

Lone senator at the Capitol during shutdown: Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts

December 27, 2018 06:06 PM

Congress

Does Pat Roberts’ farm bill dealmaking make him an ‘endangered species?’

December 26, 2018 08:02 AM

Congress

‘Remember the Alamo’: Meadows steels conservatives, Trump for border wall fight

December 22, 2018 12:34 PM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

McClatchy Washington Bureau App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Newsletters
Learn More
  • Customer Service
  • Securely Share News Tips
  • Contact Us
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service