"The court will annually review procedures for protecting communications, but it will not oversee individual cases. "
i.e., effectively zero court oversight. The justice department (or whomever) can essentially do whatever they want, eavesdrop over whomever they want, without having to obtain a warrant, or any sort of permission from any other body whatsoever. All they have to is be able to show, once a year, that their general procedures are in keeping with the bill. This absolutely and without question amounts to a total degradation of our 4th amendment rights.
Also, "[Some say] the current law unnecessarily slows down U.S. intelligence officials as they track foreigners."
The "some" in question are liars. FISA law has *always* allowed investigators to track a case-in-progress without requiring warrants ahead of time, requiring only that they get them retroactively within a reasonable time afterward. (48 hours? I don't remember the exact figure.)
And "the bill does not address President George Bush's claim that he has Article 2 constitutional authority as the commander-in-chief to order such activity during times of war."
Nope. This bill was a craven act of surrender to fascism. They can pretty up the rhetoric all they want, but this greatly erodes both the Fourth Amendment and the general principle of Rule of Law.
FISA was originally created after Watergate, specifically to provide oversight of government wiretapping, and prevent abuses. The current legislation does a lot to eviscerate its weak-to-begin-with powers.
Sadly, I'm considering doing a write-in vote of 'none of the above' this election. I'm usually republican, but I really don't like McCain. And haven't seen any good reason to vote Obama yet. Voting for the opposite of someone you don't like just strikes me as a really bad decision.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ninetydegrees
no subject
on 10 Jul 2008 15:36 (UTC)no subject
on 10 Jul 2008 16:29 (UTC)"The court will annually review procedures for protecting communications, but it will not oversee individual cases. "
i.e., effectively zero court oversight. The justice department (or whomever) can essentially do whatever they want, eavesdrop over whomever they want, without having to obtain a warrant, or any sort of permission from any other body whatsoever. All they have to is be able to show, once a year, that their general procedures are in keeping with the bill. This absolutely and without question amounts to a total degradation of our 4th amendment rights.
C'est la vie.
no subject
on 10 Jul 2008 16:53 (UTC)The "some" in question are liars. FISA law has *always* allowed investigators to track a case-in-progress without requiring warrants ahead of time, requiring only that they get them retroactively within a reasonable time afterward. (48 hours? I don't remember the exact figure.)
And "the bill does not address President George Bush's claim that he has Article 2 constitutional authority as the commander-in-chief to order such activity during times of war."
no subject
on 10 Jul 2008 16:49 (UTC)no subject
on 10 Jul 2008 15:53 (UTC)no subject
on 10 Jul 2008 17:00 (UTC)My understanding is that FISA was voted on years ago, when a lot of Congress was still in "panic" mode after 9/11.
no subject
on 10 Jul 2008 18:32 (UTC)http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25605640/
no subject
on 10 Jul 2008 19:04 (UTC)no subject
on 12 Jul 2008 03:54 (UTC)