Latest Breaking News

AnotherMcIntosh

(11,064 posts)

13. Here's the members of the FISA court:

Sun Jul 7, 2013, 12:28 AM

Jul 2013

Judge Reggie Walton (presiding) -- District of Columbia
Judge Rosemary M. Collyer -- District of Columbia
Judge Raymond J. Dearie -- Eastern District of New York
Judge Claire Eagan -- Northern District of Oklahoma
Judge Martin L.C. Feldman -- Eastern District of Louisiana
Judge Thomas Hogan -- District of Columbia
Judge Mary A. McLaughlin -- Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Judge Michael W. Mosman -- District of Oregon
Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV -- District of Massachusetts
Judge Susan Webber Wright -- Eastern District of Arkansas
Judge James Zagel -- Northern District of Illinois

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court

Do they have to be exceptional judges? Or just judges that are willing to disregard the Fourth Amendment and rubber stamp whatever is put in front of them?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

62 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

In Secret, Court Vastly Broadens Powers of N.S.A. ("almost a parallel Supreme Court") [View all] kpete Jul 2013 OP

Thank You For Sharing - This Only Gets Worse As We Begin To Learn More cantbeserious Jul 2013 #1

Why does that sound familiar... Arctic Dave Jul 2013 #2

My first thought too daleo Jul 2013 #25

TRUST US. We wouldn't lie to you, blkmusclmachine Jul 2013 #50

Drip drip nineteen50 Jul 2013 #3

those are some big drips! G_j Jul 2013 #32

Stop the neo-cons, neo-liberals and the corporate court nineteen50 Jul 2013 #33

No wonder, FISA has been stacked with John Roberts' henchmen AZ Progressive Jul 2013 #4

Bushmen, to be exact. Coyotl Jul 2013 #21

Chimp Men warrant46 Jul 2013 #61

No argument there Coyotl Jul 2013 #62

insoc. nt Javaman Jul 2013 #5

The NYT is clearly a bunch of racist Paul-bots Newsjock Jul 2013 #6

Maybe the NYTimes also is suddenly developing "Libertarian leanings." 99th_Monkey Jul 2013 #9

And you're extremely naive if you didn't know everybody has been doing this Celefin Jul 2013 #16

Psst... DeSwiss Jul 2013 #22

Psst... Celefin Jul 2013 #57

.... DeSwiss Jul 2013 #60

Has anyone checked yet for pornography connections? nt DRoseDARs Jul 2013 #54

K&R MotherPetrie Jul 2013 #7

K&R nt Mnemosyne Jul 2013 #8

Why is this court allowed to issue decisions in secret? JDPriestly Jul 2013 #10

United States of Police. Welcome to the American Fascism. Nanjing to Seoul Jul 2013 #11

WTF is the nation's surveillence court? olddad56 Jul 2013 #12

Not to correct you on this, Alkene Jul 2013 #55

Here's the members of the FISA court: AnotherMcIntosh Jul 2013 #13

Or are they judges who found favorably for the defense when BC, HRC and BO could have elehhhhna Jul 2013 #31

My gawd, how did you find that!?! Major Hogwash Jul 2013 #53

Not compatible with democracy. AzDar Jul 2013 #14

This is not democracy! Enthusiast Jul 2013 #15

Secret law is not law at all, it's arbitrary power exercised arbitrarily. nt bemildred Jul 2013 #17

This Mockery Must Stop! Demeter Jul 2013 #18

The hits just keep on coming don't they? DeSwiss Jul 2013 #19

Two words: Bush Junta! Coyotl Jul 2013 #20

Four Letters Octafish Jul 2013 #23

Less than 100 pgs in 34 years = "almost a parallel Supreme Court"? lulz. nt ucrdem Jul 2013 #24

Secret courts tend not to be wordy daleo Jul 2013 #26

Of course. Next up: Obamacare secret death panels. ucrdem Jul 2013 #27

Funny you should use a picture of Palin as you defend your inability to read for comprehension. JoeyT Jul 2013 #36

If I were YOU, bvar22 Jul 2013 #44

"The rulings, some nearly 100 pages long" HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #30

Deliberate. ForgoTheConsequence Jul 2013 #39

It follows their pattern of deception, no? HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #40

Exactly. ForgoTheConsequence Jul 2013 #41

Drat, foiled again. ucrdem Jul 2013 #42

Are you admitting you were wrong/lied? ForgoTheConsequence Jul 2013 #45

What I'm doing right now is hiding this thread. Later. nt ucrdem Jul 2013 #46

Lol. ForgoTheConsequence Jul 2013 #47

But they got the "lulz. nt." in MNBrewer Jul 2013 #51

If it's not one, it's another! Dyedinthewoolliberal Jul 2013 #28

So........ as long as Roberts is on the court he will appoint judges who are like minded... Gin Jul 2013 #29

Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Jul 2013 #34

It's in fundamental opposition to the template of the Constitution Yo_Mama Jul 2013 #35

Message auto-removed Name removed Jul 2013 #37

"the court�s still-secret decisions go far beyond any single surveillance order, the officials said" allin99 Jul 2013 #38

Catch 22 there though with the whole not requiring confirmation for appointments cstanleytech Jul 2013 #43

Gee. I guess he isn't going to be the "Transparency President" after all. bvar22 Jul 2013 #48

We're all Germans now. blkmusclmachine Jul 2013 #49

K&R pscot Jul 2013 #52

Kick Kick Kick! truebluegreen Jul 2013 #56

If you ever read Gulag Archipelago.. Javaman Jul 2013 #58

How do they know then? treestar Jul 2013 #59