13 legal scholars said the Justice Department's written justification for the NSA monitoring program "fails to offer a plausible legal defense."
Link Here
Snip...
The existence of the program was first reported last month by the New York Times. Bush later acknowledged he approved the warrantless surveillance and, along with senior lieutenants, has stoutly defended it.
In a letter Monday to congressional leaders, 13 legal scholars said the Justice Department's written justification for the NSA monitoring program "fails to offer a plausible legal defense."
In a five-page letter to House and Senate intelligence committee leaders, Assistant Attorney General William E. Moschella on Dec. 22 outlined a detailed defense for the warrantless surveillance.
He argued that Bush under a congressional resolution passed after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack, had the authority to order such electronic surveillance as part of his responsibility as commander-in-chief to protect the nation.
But the former government officials and constitutional law experts said Congress did not authorize domestic spying as part of the 2001 resolution. Lawmakers, they wrote, also "indisputably" have the authority to regulate electronic surveillance inside the United States.
The 13 experts said it is "beyond dispute that, in (our) democracy, the president cannot simply violate criminal laws behind closed doors because he deems them obsolete or impracticable."
Continues...
Snip...
The existence of the program was first reported last month by the New York Times. Bush later acknowledged he approved the warrantless surveillance and, along with senior lieutenants, has stoutly defended it.
In a letter Monday to congressional leaders, 13 legal scholars said the Justice Department's written justification for the NSA monitoring program "fails to offer a plausible legal defense."
In a five-page letter to House and Senate intelligence committee leaders, Assistant Attorney General William E. Moschella on Dec. 22 outlined a detailed defense for the warrantless surveillance.
He argued that Bush under a congressional resolution passed after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack, had the authority to order such electronic surveillance as part of his responsibility as commander-in-chief to protect the nation.
But the former government officials and constitutional law experts said Congress did not authorize domestic spying as part of the 2001 resolution. Lawmakers, they wrote, also "indisputably" have the authority to regulate electronic surveillance inside the United States.
The 13 experts said it is "beyond dispute that, in (our) democracy, the president cannot simply violate criminal laws behind closed doors because he deems them obsolete or impracticable."
Continues...
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home