Kats (wildrider) wrote,

  • Mood:
  • Music:

In which I am cheered

By this

Ruling for the Law

Published: August 18, 2006

Ever since President Bush was forced to admit that he was spying on Americans’ telephone calls and e-mail without warrants, his lawyers have fought to keep challenges to the program out of the courts. Yesterday, that plan failed. A federal judge in Detroit declared the eavesdropping program to be illegal and unconstitutional. She also offered a scathing condemnation of what lies behind the wiretapping — Mr. Bush’s attempt to expand his powers to the point that he can place himself beyond the reach of Congress, judges or the Constitution.

“There are no hereditary kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution,” wrote Judge Anna Diggs Taylor of the United States District Court in Detroit. Her decision was based on a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union.

She said Mr. Bush violated the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act when he ordered the National Security Agency to spy without a warrant on international phone calls and e-mail by Americans and foreign residents of the United States. She noted that the surveillance law was passed to prohibit just this sort of presidential abuse of power and provided ample flexibility for gathering vital intelligence. She also said that the program violated the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as the rights of free speech and association granted by the First Amendment.

The ruling eviscerated the absurd notion on which the administration’s arguments have been based: that Congress authorized Mr. Bush to do whatever he thinks is necessary when it authorized the invasion of Afghanistan.

It’s good news that this ruling exists at all. Mr. Bush’s lawyers tried to have the entire suit thrown out on national security grounds, a tactic they have used in an alarming number of cases. In one particularly appalling example, they persuaded federal judges to refuse to hear a lawsuit filed by an innocent German citizen of Lebanese birth who was snatched out of his private life, illegally imprisoned for five months and tortured by American jailers.

In this case, the administration told Judge Taylor that merely arguing its case would expose top secret information. Judge Taylor said she had reviewed the secret material and concluded it was not relevant. The secrecy claim, she said, was “disingenuous and without merit.”

No sooner had this ruling been issued than Mr. Bush’s loyalists in Congress, who have been searching for ways to give legal cover to an illegal spying program, began calling for new laws to overcome Judge Taylor’s objections. Republicans quickly pointed out that Judge Taylor was appointed by President Jimmy Carter and that some of the many precedents she cited were written by liberal judges. These efforts to undermine Judge Taylor’s arguments will undoubtedly continue while the White House appeals the decision, and the outcome in the conservative Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals is uncertain.

But for now, with a careful, thoroughly grounded opinion, one judge in Michigan has done what 535 members of Congress have so abysmally failed to do. She has reasserted the rule of law over a lawless administration and shown why issues of this kind belong within the constitutional process created more than two centuries ago to handle them.

Today I decided I was finally tired of trying to clean the top of the old kitchen garbage pail, which I believe we may have had since Magnus lived with us, so we went over to Linens & Things and got a new one, making the startling discovery that even the same sort of crappy plastic bin we had run around $30 - so we coughed up a bit more and got a good stainless steel one with a removeable interior bin and step-lift lid. We decided on a step down from the one on sale for $109 (marked down from $119). My, kitchen garbage pails have changed in the last decade. There was also a complete set of towels and shower curtain that matched the bathroom utensils set we bought a few months ago, but that was out of my price range for now.

rahirah bought me a Kitchenaid slow cooker for my birthday! Wow, talk about your Cadillac of slow cookers (i.e., crockpot-without-the-TM)! *happy dance*

Now if only I could get out from the shadow of debt, we could get some real work done around the house... *dreaming and wishing and hoping* I should do the "if I had a million dollars" meme I saw over at sillymagpie's journal.


Winning 100 Million Dollars Survey

If you won 100 million dollars what would you do?

What kind of car would you buy?I would be very bad and get myself a Chevy Avalanche (and yes, I know, it's not environmentally friendly... but I LIKE it). I might also get a restored 1979 El Camino. Or find one and have it restored.
Where in the country would you move to?Back to Tucson, probably; a summer house on Mt. Lemmon and a winter house down in the valley.
What kind of house would you buy?As above - a mountain cabin up in Summerhaven, and just a nice, masonry-built solid house in a good neighborhood, where it's generally quiet, not a lot of traffic, and no gated communities, condos, or homeowners associations as far as I can see.
Would you give your family any money?Definitely. I'd want to give Mom as much as she's given me - buy her that Cadillac Escalade she liked, for example (instead of the diecast one I gave her for Christmas a few years back).
What charity would you donate to?The Arizona Humane Society and the ASPCA; the Red Cross, the Wallace Foundation, PBS/NPR. Etc.
Would you give your friends any money?Certainly.
Where would you go on vacation?Everywhere!
What luxury item would you buy first?Either the house or the car. Then maybe that Cuisinart ice-cream mix maker, just for fun.
Would it change your life?Most definitely. To live above the poverty level would change my life.
Would you save any of it?Yes. I'd be able to make some contributions to my Van Mutual funds and maybe actually KEEP some money in my ING account (and start a Roth, too).
Would it change your current relationship?Never. We always say we have happiness, now all we need is the money.
Would you quit your job?Yes, but I would keep writing.
Would you ever work again?As a writer, always.
What one task would you never do again?Get up on a schedule to go to work.
What dream of yours would you be able to do?See Egypt.
Would you change the way you dress?Nah, not really. I'd be able to buy the "real thing" instead of cheap knockoffs, though.
Would you change anything about your body?I'd get Lasik and get rid of the glasses; I'd have more time for serious working out (and I'd give a real attempt at using such time), and maybe a few tucks to get rid of the loose flesh I still have from the weight loss, but on the whole, not much.
Would you miss anything about not bring rich?No.
Who would be the first person you tell?Barb, then Mom.
Would it bring you happyness?As I said, I have happiness. (Spelled correctly.) All I need now is the money.
Take This Survey at Quizopolis.com


ETA: More good things.
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.