Comments on Orin Kerr on NSA Director Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander on FISA
Posted by Moonage on 08 Jan 2006 | Tagged as: Opinions
Orin Kerr of Volokh posted this news quote:
Of which he got a ton of comments. People proving why NSA/Bush is guilty, people proving why NSA/Bush is not. People questioning the motivation of Alexander to even assert that what they did was legal.
This IMO is the problem over the whole thing right now. These people are no different than CNN or Foxnews. I can’t turn either on without them parading a bunch of people who have no real insight as to whether this action was legal or not. The problem for me is all these un-qualified opinions are swamping the media and burying the quantified arguments pro or con.
And, for what it’s worth, Orin doesn’t even suggest either way that Gen. Alexander’s comments were appropriate or not. He doesn’t have to. I doubt anyone would have listened or cared. People have made their mind up, the legal process is irrelevent.
- Technorati NSA, FISA, Keith Alexander,Bush wiretap
6 Comments »
on 09 Jan 2006 at 10:47 pm 1.StormWarning
said …
Suggested reading:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/m010506.pdf
“…While courts have generally accepted that the President has the power to conduct domestic electronic surveillance within the United States inside the constraints of the Fourth Amendment, no court has held squarely that the Constitution disables the Congress from endeavoring to set limits on that power. To the contrary, the Supreme Court has stated that Congress does indeed have power to regulate domestic surveillance, and has not ruled on the extent to which Congress can act with respect to electronic surveillance to collect foreign intelligence information. Given such uncertainty, the Administration’s legal justification, as presented in the summary analysis from the Office of Legislative Affairs, does not seem to be as well-grounded as the tenor of that letter suggests.”
on 10 Jan 2006 at 9:05 am 2.Moonage
said …
While not intending to diminish the CRS opinion, I do have to wonder why the Federation of American Scientists would feel compelled to weigh in on a purely legal disoute?
In regards to the opinion itself, I don’t see where “no court has held squarely that the Constitution disables the Congress from endeavoring to set limits on that power” even applies to the current situation. Congress enabled the wiretaps with the passage of the original USA Patriot Act (vis a vis FISA) and Bush informed Congress of what he was doing. As such, this was as much a Congressional action as it was a Bush thing whether certain members like it or not.
What the paper does do well is explain the long-standing tension between the President’s office and Congress over the issue of intelligence gathering. And, all we are seeing now is that same tension being illustrated on national media. In this case, I feel it is nothing but an effort by those certain members to gut the Patriot Act by blowing this whole issue out of proportion.
And do note lastly, CRS papers are commissioned by individual members of Congress.
on 10 Jan 2006 at 10:17 am 3.StormWarning
said …
“CRS papers are commissioned by individual members of Congress.”
I did not know that. How come then, that in itself, is not stated anywhere in the CRS report (the Member who commissioned the report). I read the thing twice, and I never noticed a name of the Member who commissioned the report.
As for FAS, I’m guessing that they became the Internet repository of the document, and not much else.
on 10 Jan 2006 at 12:51 pm 4.Moonage
said …
They don’t have to cite who requests a report. They are given a task and they do it. The finished report is free to anyone who wants it.
From their site:
http://www.loc.gov/crsinfo/
The Congressional Research Service is where Members of Congress turn for the nonpartisan research,
analysis, and information they need to make informed decisions on behalf of the American people.
If you notice from the website address, they are a function of the Library of Congress. As such, I would think the LOC would be the internet repository.
on 10 Jan 2006 at 7:41 pm 5.StormWarning
said …
But the key to what you posted is that CRS is for non-partisan research, analysis, and information they need to make informed decisions on behalf of the American people.
on 10 Jan 2006 at 10:52 pm 6.Moonage
said …
But the point I’m stressing is the Federation of American SCIENTISTS have no dog in this political fight. None. The information is readily available I would assume at the LOC site. What is their point? Why would they even offer a point? That is my point. Everyone’s chiming in when it doesn’t contribute to the REAL debate and a lot of it’s wrong opinions pro and con. That’s what that paper is as well. It’s information gleened by CRS from already existing information that has already been presented by both sides and they have come to their own conclusions that are meaningless UNLESS someone takes it to court OR Congress attempts to reign in those powers. That’s the only debate that will truly matter.