Carter’s Warrantless Wiretapping
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in History, The War On Terrorism
The Washington Times is writing about it today.
HOWEVER, Carter did it in 1977. The FISA laws were enacted in 1978. So when Power Line cites the Truong case, they fail to acknowledge that Carter wasn’t bound by the same laws Bush is. Typical for Power Line, but still disappointing.
From the ruling…
For several reasons, the needs of the executive are so compelling in the area of foreign intelligence, unlike the area of domestic security, that a uniform warrant requirement would, following [United States v. United States District Court, 407 U.S. 297 (1972)], “unduly frustrate� the President in carrying out his foreign affairs responsibilities. First of all, attempts to counter foreign threats to the national security require the utmost stealth, speed and secrecy. A warrant requirement would add a procedural hurdle that would reduce the flexibility of executive foreign intelligence activities, in some cases delay executive response to foreign intelligence threats, and increase the chance of leaks regarding sensitive executive operations.
Also, Carter wasn’t spying on peace activists, and yet Captain’s Quarters calls Carter’s actions hypocritical:
Not only does Jimmy Carter betray his hypocrisy here, but his Attorney General told Congress when it debated the FISA law in 1978 that FISA would not impede the president from exercising precisely this power under the Constitution. The Times also notes that Jamie Gorelick said much the same thing in 1994. In any case, the appellate court certainly agreed with both Bell and Carter in 1980, even after passage of FISA the year after the surveillance took place.
Isn’t one interpretation, of these AG’s opinions, that FISA wouldn’t stop a President conducting these types of searches because they could get a warrant AFTER the fact? That’s really what we’re talking about here. I don’t have any problem with Bush eavesdropping, but if he does it and then doesn’t get a retroactive warrant, well, that’s illegal. And since 1978, we’ve apparently not have anybody try to skirt these laws until Bush.
In any event, for a more reasoned view take a look at Q&O.
This entry was posted on Saturday, February 11th, 2006 and is filed under History, The War On Terrorism. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 11th, 2006 at 7:35 pm
This will cover everything, from 9/11 until now.
Because the Bush adminstration came to power by fraudulent and deceptive means (twice) and in order to stay in power they MUST continue to use fraud, lies and deception. This is a manditory requirement for anyone apointed by Bush & Co. Therefore anything, ANYTHING generated from the White how must be scrutinized for solid facts.
These are not decent people, American in name omly, not beleif. Why don’t so many of our citizens get that?
Why are too many citizens or the media or congress or the senate still debating anything Bush & Co. spits out as if it were credible and beyond reproach?
This adminstration is composed of greedy, cowardly vultures and all of those, particular those that hold the public trust through elected office and those trusted to give the truth to the public via the media and DID NOT raise a voice to this putrid presidency it will go down in history as America’s greatest cowards, America’s greatest shame.
As for me, I’m ashamed of them now.
We are a nation of fools.
February 12th, 2006 at 1:02 am
Well John, way to jump on the soapbox. The majority is down below you on solid intellectually honest ground.
Listen, if you want to comment on this story, fine. But this site isn’t a place for zealots or name callers. This is a place for debate in the spirit of what we’ve lost given this partisan firestorm.
Please respect that.
February 12th, 2006 at 2:31 am
The original post at B&O wasn’t that informative, but the comment thread was.
Thank you.
February 12th, 2006 at 2:33 am
Sorry — that should be “Q&O” not “B&O,” above
(there are certainly times I wish one could correct the comment after you read what you have written )
February 12th, 2006 at 5:20 pm
I hope this will not be an excuse for more pressure on Iran. any sanction and hardline poletics against Iran will just enforce radical groups and this is against Iranians as well.
February 13th, 2006 at 12:32 am
This is a moving target of a prosecution. Is the argument that the wiretapping was unconstitutional because it violated peoples 4th Amendment rights or because it violated the seperation of powers, or a combination of the two? Your condescending remarks toward PowerLine are laughable. I thought it was responding to the crux of the grievance — but apparently that is the legislative language of FISA. Jimmy Carters words were hypocritical. He proclaims that “innocent Americans” may have had their “privacy violated” — that sounds like a 4th Amendment argument to me. In fact that was the very argument that the Truong guy made – amazingly stupid.
The question of whether the wiretapping was within the scope of FISA and thus requiring a retroactive warrant is a seperate issue. Then there is the issue of the inherent power of the executive to do what is necessary despite Congress. Then there is the AUMF which could have legally bestowed a DUTY upon the President to bypass the FISA court.
This whole issue is a great test of political leanings and you have to love what it reveals. Yes, very smart lawyers are analyzing the arguments and making good arguments both ways based on a set of very generalized facts – the facts they are analyzing might not even be the real facts. The legality of the wiretaps will ultimately rest on the specific facts of the case which are TOP SECRET. So those people obssessing and so certain of the grievous constitutional wrongs reveal obvious partisan hackery without case specific facts.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
[...] not get in the way of reupping FISA legislation that has existed for the past 30 years. And as I said back in 2006…it’s not about eavesdropping…it’s about the lack of accountability… I [...]