Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Political Texts | The Morning News »

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Unconstitutional Amendments

posted by on September 27 at 2:38 AM

In a decision that gets righteous about the Fourth Amendment and cites the Federalist Papers and the Bill of Rights, a Federal District Court Judge in Oregon reined in the PATRIOT Act yesterday.

U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken said that the PATRIOT Act —which amended the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)—violated the Constitution because it, “permits the executive branch of government to conduct surveillance and searches of American citizens without satisfying the probable cause requirement of the Fourth Amendment.”

The ruling went in favor of plaintiff Brandon Mayfield, a Muslim attorney in Portland who was wrongly arrested and held by the FBI in 2004 in connection with the Madrid bombings.

From the decision:

Moreover, the constitutionally required interplay between Executive action, Judicial decision, and Congressional enactment, has been eliminated by the FISA amendments. Prior to the amendments, the three branches of government operated with thoughtful and deliberate checks and balances - a principle upon which our Nation was founded. These constitutional checks and balances effectively curtail overzealous executive, legislative, or judicial activity regardless of the catalyst for overzealousness. The Constitution contains bedrock principles that the framers believed essential. Those principles should not be easily altered by the expediencies of the moment.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has a succinct break down of the District Court’s ruling here.

RSS icon Comments

1

Well its about time! Sheesh.

Posted by Toby | September 27, 2007 6:49 AM
2

Fuck yeah!

Posted by Greg | September 27, 2007 7:35 AM
3

Please be permanent please be permanent please be permanent please be permanent...

Posted by Me | September 27, 2007 7:56 AM
4

I sympathize, Me, but I believe there are at least three or four additional courts at the Federal Appellate, Federal Circuit and Supreme Court levels that could drag this decision out, and provide opportunities for reversal.

And I don't doubt for a minute the Feds will continue to appeal, and that a final outcome on the case won't see the light of day until well after shrub has retired to the $50,000 a pop lecture circuit.

Posted by COMTE | September 27, 2007 9:25 AM
5

It's the USA PATRIOT Act, not the PATRIOT Act.

Posted by Phil M | September 27, 2007 9:41 AM
6

USA USA USA!! (@5 because let's be honest, otherwise people might confuse which country we're supposed to support with our patriotism.)

Posted by Katelyn | September 27, 2007 9:47 AM
7

@5, I know. That's what I hate about legal rulings: half the time they mean nothing, especially the ones where the judge makes a ruling, and then with the next bang of his/her gavel stays it.

Still, it is nice to see a judge come out against it (as if it's happened before, I've never seen it).

Posted by Me | September 27, 2007 1:25 PM
8

Katelyn, it's not about countries or patriotism. It's about uniting and strengthening America by providing appropriate tools required to intercept and obstruct terrorism. I think referring to it by anything other than its full name makes it too easy to forget how manipulatively it was named.

Posted by Phil M | September 27, 2007 3:24 PM
9

@8
Someone worked long and hard to come up with that title, didn't they? They had to find enough vowels and everything. Yuck.

Posted by kelsey | September 27, 2007 4:43 PM
10

Kelsey, "yuck" is putting it nicely.

They worked long and hard to come up with the title and they worked long and hard to write the legislation -- probably longer than the time between September 11, 2001, and enactment of the Act. Neoconservatives had been wanting this sort of thing for a long time. 9/11, like "a new Pearl Harbor," was the perfect excuse to enact it. They benefited greatly from 9/11. They were in the positions to prevent 9/11. They told us who did it, then they first refused to investigate, then performed a bullshit investigation, ignored any evidence that didn't support their story, and told us the same story again. Most Americans are satisfied with this situation.

Posted by Phil M | September 27, 2007 5:34 PM
11
Posted by Josh Feit | September 27, 2007 10:58 PM
12
Posted by Phil M | September 28, 2007 10:47 AM
13

The Mega-Lie Called the "War on Terror": A Masterpiece of Propaganda
By Richard W. Behan, AlterNet
Posted on September 27, 2007, Printed on September 28, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/63632/

Posted by Phil M | September 28, 2007 11:38 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).