Jan 12, 2006

"Security First" [LINK]

It's been a while...

I agree with Tim Galvin's response to Evan Meinder's challenge. I, too, would have no problem with a future President Hillary Clinton monitoring transmissions from possible terrorists overseas. I would only dispute Mr. Galvin's observation that "we live in a different world now where such drastic measures" are appropriate.

The President's Article II-based authority to engage in warrantless surveillance for the purpose of foreign intelligence has been recognized long before September 11, has been upheld repeatedly by the judiciary, and is neither new nor drastic. On the other hand, the notion that the FISA court, which unlike the NSA program targets domestic suspects and internal communications consistent with the Fourth Amendment, would somehow trump the President's preeminent authority on foreign threats, is a truly drastic novelty.

As yet, no comments: