Warantless Wiretaps: The Constitution, Civil Liberties and Security

A federal judge in Detroit ruled that the warrantless eavesdropping conducting by the NSA was illegal and unconstitutional, a conclusion shared by the vast majority of legal scholars outside of the Bush Administration. The fight against terrorism shouldn't erode the rights of U.S. citizens. If the government suspects a phone call is related to terrorist activity, it should be able to eavesdrop on the conversation, but it should have to get a court's permission to do so. The 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act established a secret court to grant warrants for the monitoring of such phone calls. The judge ruled that The Bush administration should go to this court before eavesdropping on calls. In all honesty, I could care less if the government is listening in on my conversations, but there's more to this than that. The fact is that this administration has been continuously breaking laws--from the post-WWII Geneva Conventions to Bush's illegal line-item vetoes--that we've held for over half a century by resorting to the excuse that we are at war. This increasing abuse of power has become too readily accepted, and the fact is that in her ruling the federal judge explained that getting warants in a secret court would provide ample opportunity for the federal government to ensure our security. Recalling the internment of Japanese-Americans in World War II and the persecution of liberals labeled "Communists" during the Cold War makes me shiver to think what might happen to our civil liberties if there were to be another attack.