Supreme Court Rejects ACLU Domestic Spying Case


Crossposted from STOP THE ACLU: Supreme Court Rejects ACLU Domestic Spying Case...



Basically, because: the case had nothing to do with spying on domestic citizens; was supposed to be a secret program; and common sense the ACLU lacks. What it came down to was that none of the plaintiff's had any standing. The ACLU feared that some of their conversations with terrorist representatives might have been listened to, however they couldn't provide any evidence of that.



Wake Up America:




The ACLU consistently insists that programs such as the NSA wiretapping program goes against civil liberties and opposing opinions just as consistently insist that National Security depends on being able to monitor calls and contacts from the U.S. to terror groups outside the U.S to be able to protect America from further terrorist attacks.



The courts are caught in the middle and have to walk a fine line between civil liberties and protecting America because ruling against one may "step on" the other.




However, in this case it was a position from the ACLU that was full of holes and couldn't pass muster to even be argued. The ACLU are calling it a catch 22 because the program being secret keeps them from being able to prove whether they haved been listened to. Really, I hope the government is listening in on the ACLU phone calls.



Here is the news:




"It's very disturbing that the president's actions will go unremarked upon by the court," said Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU's national security project. "In our view, it shouldn't be left to executive branch officials alone to determine the limits."



The Terrorist Surveillance Program no longer exists, although the administration has maintained it was legal.



The ACLU sued on behalf of itself, other lawyers, reporters and scholars, arguing that the program was illegal and that they had been forced to alter how they communicate with foreigners who were likely to have been targets of the wiretapping.




I'm just curious as to why the ACLU had to alter the way they were communicating with foreigners. When did the Constitution provide civil liberties for anyone besides American citizens? (See PS from Chris, below) What did the ACLU need to talk to foreigners about that they were afraid of the government knowing? Nice to see the ACLU slapped down with some common sense.



Michelle Malkin says, "America 1. ACLU 0!



Rusty at MPJ:




If the ACLU is correct, it means that the lapsing of the FISA law is no big deal. In fact, law enforcement may now have more ability to monitor terrorist activities because of the compromises included in the new law which give FISA courts much more power to oversee law-enforcement monitoring activities.




Pirate's Cove mocks the ACLU!

Liberty Pundit sums it all up nicely.



(PS from Chris: Foreigners within our borders are extended most of the same civil liberties as American citizens, but that is not germane to this case.)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Biden Record, and the Democrats Who Supported It, Pt. 4: How Biden Blew Up the Economy With Inflation

   The US economy is in chaos. This is not "spin," or "opinion," but a fact. Some people aren't feeling it as hard as others, because they were well-off before the inflation started. Unfortunately, the worst is yet to come, and it will affect those "well-off" people, to a greater degree than it does currently, as the recession sets in. It also will present a crisis for government, as the interest rates for the chronic borrowing that sustains all of their largesse double, triple, or even quadruple. How did we get here, after what was shaping up as a robust recovery from the pandemic response inspired recession?    When Pres. Biden was elected, almost every policy that had been in place was reversed. We've looked at the disatrous results of this on the southern border , but what's happened to our economy has impacted many more Americans. It started out on day one, when Biden killed the KeystoneXL pipeline, followed by freezing new federal leases
Read more

The Biden Debacle Part II

  In my previous post, I wrote about Pres. Biden's disastrous policy at the border, as well as it's impact on the spread of COVID. I also noted his false promise of bipartisanship, and embrace of the far left agenda. This post will deal with some of that agenda, including it's impact on the economy, law enforcement, race relations, education and the military. They're all interconnected in no small way, and Pres. Biden is making a mess of them all. With the left wing ascendant in his own party, he has found it easier to go along with them, rather than work with Republicans, even when they propose policies that a majority of Democrats support. The economy was recovering before Biden assumed office, and yet he continues to push a long wish list of leftist policies in the name of "recovery." The extension of unemployment benefits is a good example of how they can backfire. While he denies that the extra payments were keeping people from returning to work, the sta
Read more

The Bogus Charges Against Pres. Trump, Part IV

      One can say many critical things about former Pres. Trump, many of which may be true. However, there is one thing that also is true, but is not critical: He has been the most unjustly accused president of the modern era. It's a fact: The "Russian collusion" allegations, which were not true. The two "impeachments," that didn't follow the regular House rules so blatantly that they were dismissed by the Senate both times, and now, a Manhattan DA has indicted Trump on the most spurious of grounds.    It's about time that DA Alvin Bragg was thrown out of office. This "prosecutorial overreach" should just be the final straw, because he has enough reasons preceding this. Abusing "discretion" to cover a "blanket" ban on prosecuting any specific offense is an abuse of power. He doesn't get to order his ADA's how to use their discretion, on specific crimes. It's incredibly ironic that he now is trying to upgrade a mi
Read more