Court ruled that the FISA Courts could not encroach on the President's authority...

[no1tovote4]

Court ruled that the FISA Courts could not encroach on the President's authority...

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/fiscr111802.html

It will be recalled that the case that set forth the primary purpose test as constitutionally required was Truong. The Fourth Circuit thought that Keith’s balancing standard implied the adoption of the primary purpose test. We reiterate that Truong dealt with a pre-FISA surveillance based on the President’s constitutional responsibility to conduct the foreign affairs of the United States. 629 F.2d at 914. Although Truong suggested the line it drew was a constitutional minimum that would apply to a FISA surveillance, see id. at 914 n.4, it had no occasion to consider the application of the statute carefully. The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it. We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President’s constitutional power. The question before us is the reverse, does FISA amplify the President’s power by providing a mechanism that at least approaches a classic warrant and which therefore supports the government’s contention that FISA searches are constitutionally reasonable.

FISA is primarily used to obtain warrants for criminal investigation... According to the courts if the President is collecting foreign intelligence, such as where those calls terminated or begun, there is no need for a warrant unless there is a need for criminal investigation.

I'm fascinated by this law, it appears that so long as they are not fully domestic, it applies to foreign intel, and there is no criminal investigation there is no need for a warrant...

 

[Annie]

Court ruled that the FISA Courts could not encroach on the President's authority...

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/fiscr111802.html



FISA is primarily used to obtain warrants for criminal investigation... According to the courts if the President is collecting foreign intelligence, such as where those calls terminated or begun, there is no need for a warrant unless there is a need for criminal investigation.

I'm fascinated by this law, it appears that so long as they are not fully domestic, it applies to foreign intel, and there is no criminal investigation there is no need for a warrant...

That's what is my current understanding of the law is. From what has been published, which I think should not have been, my understanding is that the unwarranted surveillence was on calls between this and another country. For those where both parties were in US, warrants were sought.

 

[Bonnie]

That's what is my current understanding of the law is. From what has been published, which I think should not have been, my understanding is that the unwarranted surveillence was on calls between this and another country. For those where both parties were in US, warrants were sought.

I think this now puts foreign terrorists communicating to their comrades here in the US on notice as well, at least that's how I understand this whole thing.

 

[Annie]

I think this now puts foreign terrorists communicating to their comrades here in the US on notice as well, at least that's how I understand this whole thing.

Exactly, which why I wrote that it should NOT have been leaked. Aiding and abetting the enemy.

 

[theim]

Shh....What's that sound? I think it's another Democratic fantasy crashing to pieces around them.

 

[no1tovote4]

The Libs on a certain site I visit on occassion are saying, "Then why aren't they using this in their argument?"

My answer, "They will."

 

[Annie]

The Libs on a certain site I visit on occassion are saying, "Then why aren't they using this in their argument?"

My answer, "They will."

My guess on why Bush is seeming to be so chipper and in control. Others have noticed too:


http://polipundit.com/index.php?p=11676