The recent ruling by Judge Anna Diggs Taylor that the NSA wiretapping program is unconstitutional was widely criticized (of course) by our administration and its supporters. Glenn Greenwald, 1st Amendment attorney, brings us
a technical refutation of one of the most widely-hailed critics of the decision, Orin Kerr. It turns out many of the critics against Taylor misdirected their attacks against her, because
the DOJ was too stupid to address the merits of the plantiffs' case, focused only on insisting that Taylor was unable to hear the case due to national security concerns. Also see former Dean of UChicago's Law School, and Constitutional law expert
Professor Geoffrey Stone, who says he is,
"confident Judge Taylor reached the right result as a matter of law"
Think lightning only hits believers
playing the part of Jesus, or
in church, or
praying at a cross?
Wrong.
In other news, the Anti-Defamation League has
issued a caustic chastisement against D. James Kennedy's portrayal of the link between evolution and the Holocaust. Kennedy also
disingenuously misrepresented Dr. Francis Collins' views, as well as inserting this interview with him without his knowledge into the documentary, then got caught and retracted.
________________
Technorati tags: Culture Wars
I suspect that's going to be overturned on procedural grounds. From what I've heard there's some worry about whether the plaintiffs were competent to file suit.
ReplyDeleteAs for lightning hitting people, I always understood it tended to hit people hiding under trees in thunderstorms.
You're correct in that standing is the principal weakness. However, how do plantiffs show that they were harmed, when they would have to prove that their calls were monitored, and the only way to accomplish this is to have access to NSA/national security records?
ReplyDeleteThe judge addressed this problem already, in saying that if they were not allowed to bring the case, that the power of the government to spy on its citizens would remain completely unchecked.
How much good has this program done? None.
Well, on the 'harm' issue, the question surely is whether their work was harmed by wiretapping.
ReplyDeleteAgain, on the issue of the judge, I think we shall have to wait for the appeal to see whether the judge's opinion was valid.
On your final point. How can you know whether the programme has done any good, when it is by definition secret? You admit that you cannot know what harm the programme may have done.