Federal judge rules 2 parts of Patriot Act unconstitutional

[~Sophia~]

It is critical that we, as a democratic nation, pay close attention to traditional Fourth Amendment principles," wrote Judge Ann Aiken of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon in her 44-page decision.

The government "is asking this court to, in essence, amend the Bill of Rights, by giving it an interpretation that would deprive it of any real meaning. The court declines to do so," Aiken said.

"For over 200 years, this nation has adhered to the rule of law -- with unparalleled success. A shift to a nation based on extra-constitutional authority is prohibited, as well as ill-advised," she wrote.

full article

[softwareNerd]

On the face of it, this seems like a good ruling. Commentary on these things seems split between those who want to let the executive branch do anything it thinks reasonable, versus those who want to stop them from doing anything. What's required is objective guidelines coupled with legislative and judicial oversight; and this should be implemented in way that allows urgent action to be taken and reviewed after the event.

Here's the fourth amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[Qwertz]

The side effect of FISA (that is, FISA as amended by USA PATRIOT ACT) unconstitutionality is that it might shift the balance of power. President has been arguing all along that FISA was unconstitutional (remember the secret memo?). See, if FISA is constitutional, then it limits the President's ability to conduct international wiretapping, despite the AUMF. If FISA is constitutional, then President has to go to FISA court to get warrants for international wiretapping. If FISA is unconstitutional, then we fall back on the AUMF, which lets President conduct wiretapping on calls between US citizens and foreign nationals without obtaining any warrant. The question of whether those warrantless wiretaps are constitutional is debatable, but there is strong precedent establishing that Presidential surveillance of international communications is well within President's war powers, which Congress explicitly authorized him to use under the AUMF.

Excitement!

~Q