Democrats agree with President Bush that wiretapping is good for America?

Question

Protect America Act passed the House and the Seante.

"The House passed this bill which would temporarily expand the executive branch’s authority to spy on suspected foreign terrorists without a court order, when communications are passing through the U.S."

"The Senate passed this bill which would temporarily expand the executive branch’s authority to spy on suspected foreign terrorists without a court order, when communications are passing through the U.S."

Is this constitutional?

Answer 1

It is constitutional as long as there is judicial oversight. (See FISA court.)

Look, we all want to keep our freedoms and stay safe from future terrorist activities. The truth is, we need good intelligence. We also don't want our government spying on or keeping secret files on its citizens without probable cause.

So, wiretapping is a necessary, constitutional tool in the intelligence game; HOWEVER circumventing the FISA court, or any other judicial oversight that ensures that the data gathered is consistent with the nature of the data sought, is absolutely unconstitutional.

Answer 2

The "thing" about this measure is
the FACT that the whole purpose OF it -- is NOT the wiretapping itself -- it is the allowance of it being done WITHOUT a court order to DO SO !!
There has been an allowance of wiretaps for law enforcement purposes in place for a long long time !! THIS measure gives authority to the "powers that be" to do this procedure WITHOUT DUE PROCESS -- and, therein is the "THING" that is NOT in the best interests of the citizens OF this country !!! It is but another in a long series of actions being taken by the entire government -- to remove ALL rights from the population TO DUE PROCESS --- and it ALL is being done under the DISGUISE of the "war on terror" !!!
It is "supposed" to be a tool in the war on terror BUT, with the flip of the wrist -- any agency using this freedom OF law on anyone for any purpose can "link it" to ongoing investigations OF "terroristic activities" and say that they simply "ran across" the lead in their work !!
It is an abomination against the civil liberties of the citizens OF this country and the Democrats have proven yet again that they are in total meltdown from the exact purpose for which they were sent to Washington to begin with -- and are proving every day that THEY are rapidly becoming a major part OF the problems there -- and nowhere NEAR the solution !!!!!!!

Answer 3

I'm sure the ACLU or someone will file suit against this and the courts will decide if it passes constitutional muster. Obviously, since this passed with significant Democratic support, the case presented in Congress must have been a strong one to warrant this action.

You get what you ask for. After 9/11, the lefties whined quite loudly about "putting the pieces together". Now the administration is doing just that, and guess who's whining about that?

Answer 4

Politicians in this country are retards. At best they are only 'ethical' retards but much of the time they are much more than that.

Isn't this the very thing they were complaining about earlier? What exactly were they complaining about? Not the fact the president used these powers but that they weren't allowed to give them to him! See how dumb these people are?

Here is an idea. STOP ALL immigration. If you want to make a case that someone is not an American citizen and doesn't have our rights, don't let them into our f@#&^&*^ing country! There is no right to immigrate. Then you don't need to spy on people here.

Answer 5

Although the things coming out of the WH seem unconstitutional and may border the edges of law this is a time of war and basically all bets are off. In matters of national security the supreme court would probably side with the president on most security matters especially considering terrorism is relatively new to us. There was also a secret document passed around the senate before the vote that must have been pretty important to national security for them to pass the bill so easily.

Answer 6

Wow Matt, you got some interesting answers to this question. Anyways, I thought libs were all upset about the government expanding it's power and spying without limitations or accountability. I guess Dems think this is okay but isn't it a foot in the door? Oh well, I'm okay with it. Now is it constitutional? I guess it depends on if you are a constitutionalist or if you agree with our judges that don't "interpret" (oh wait - that's another topic)

Answer 7

A huge gutless mistake. I hope each of these senators lose their next election. How you can vote against the 4th Amendment is criminal in my eyes. But so is torture, suspending Habaes Corpus and a war for profit. All disgusting...

Answer 8

What could possably be wrong with listening in on terrorists planing anouther attack on the US? If we had done this years ago we could have stoped 9/11. I am all for spying on terrrorists, they have no rights. Why protect the privacy of people who want to kill us?

Answer 9

Why wouldn't it be ?

The 4th amendment says "unreasonable search"

Isn't it reasonable to wiretap a suspected terrorist in a foreign country even if he calls someone in america ?

I don't see what the big deal is about.

Answer 10

we are in a war against terrorists - therefore if the enemy is NOT a citizen of the US they are NOT protected under OUR constitution - but if the us govt spy on american citizens without going through normal procedures protected by the constitution it is unlawful-