U.S. federal judge rules warrantless wiretapping unconstitutional

[Roon]

breaking on http://www.msnbc.msn.com/


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14393611/

edited to add link

[Oreo]

1. Damn activist judges...

Who do they think they are defending the Constitution?

[Beetwasher]

6. Why Do They Hate America and Support Al Quaeda?

:shrug:

[Divine Discontent]

9. LOL

so true... how dare they defend that great document.


http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14393611/
BREAKING NEWS

Updated: 3 minutes ago
DETROIT - A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs.




www.cafepress.com/warisprofitable

[SharonRB]

2. So now what?

I assume they'll go to the Supremes and get it overturned. Stop! in the name of Bush....

[sinkingfeeling]

3. Hope they don't give out his name...the crazy RW might try to kill him.

[OregonBlue]

8. I think it's a woman judge and it's at ap.org.

[Synnical]

37. Yeah, feel the love here at yahoo

http://news.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?action=m&board=37138469&tid=apwarrantlesssurveillance&sid=37138469&mid=553

I'M FROM MI & I HATE THIS CUNT AND
by: uhot_not 08/17/06 12:33 pm
Msg: 553 of 600
3 recommendations

The other Idiot morons in Michigan who support terrorists and arab's .... my gov't in Michigan has been soooooooooooooo tolerant of filthy arabs in Mi, that the state has more Filthy arabs living here than Bagdad ... This dumb bitch must be black or screwing a sand-n*gger to rule like this ... may she and her family be the first to go in the next terror attack that she just allowed to be planned.

3 other loving people recommended this posting!



:puke:

BTW - here's the yahoo link, if you'd care to rate it up.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060817/ap_on_go_pr_wh/warrantless_surveillance

[CoffeeCat]

58. At least this evil racist speaks his truth...

Although I'm disgusted by this poster, at least he's out there revealing his true opinions. Most Republicans who
feel this way, hide behind their three-piece suits and status in the community--and they talk like this among
themselves---hiding their sinister personalities from the public.

[CollegeDUer]

4. But what will happen to those who put it in action if its illegal?

I mean if you break the law, there are consequences. Why do I have a nasty feeling like there won't be any consequences here -- effectively nullifying the law?

[NMDemDist2]

12. welcome to DU CollegeDUer!

and let's hope there are still SOME patriots willing to enforce the Constitution and the American Law

:hi:

[LeighAnn]

16. Kind of like the War Crimes Act

Now they are trying to make war crimes retroactively not illegal for administration officials and CIA contractors.

That seems to be the wave of the future... making illegal things retroactively legal.

[Beetwasher]

5. Whoa! Hello! QUICK! More Jon Benet News Before More People Hear About This

n/t

[underpants]

7. Bush issues signing statement

Full text (form PDF) here

Neener Neener Neener

[brooklynite]

10. Details...

Federal judge orders end to wiretap program
Says governments listening in without warrant is unconstitutional

DETROIT - A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14393611/

[Purveyor]

11. AP Wire Report

(08-17) 09:10 PDT DETROIT (AP) --

A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs. They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, which involves secretly taping conversations between people in the U.S. and people in other countries.

The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.

The ACLU said the state-secrets argument was irrelevant because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule.

[antigop]

13. THANK YOU, JIMMY CARTER!!!! (Carter appointee)

http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=2345

[Divine Discontent]

15. nice one antigop! n/t

[NotGivingUp]

68. we love you, anna and jimmy!

[brooklynite]

14. Court Ruling here

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION et al. v. NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY / CENTRAL et al.

JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION ORDER
For the reasons set forth in an accompanying Memorandum Opinion, Plaintiffs’ Motion
for Partial Summary Judgment is GRANTED. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or, in
the Alternative, for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants, its agents, employees, representatives, and
any other persons or entities in active concert or participation with Defendants, are permanently
enjoined from directly or indirectly utilizing the Terrorist Surveillance Program (hereinafter
“TSP”) in any way, including, but not limited to, conducting warrantless wiretaps of telephone and internet communications, in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
(hereinafter “FISA”) and Title III;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND DECLARED that the TSP violates the Separation of
Powers doctrine, the Administrative Procedures Act, the First and Fourth Amendments to the
United States Constitution, the FISA and Title III;

IT IS ALSO ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED
with respect to Plaintiffs’ data-mining claim and is DENIED regarding Plaintiffs’ remaining
claims;

IT IS ALSO ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is
GRANTED in its entirety.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: August 17, 2006 s/Anna Diggs Taylor
Detroit, Michigan ANNA DIGGS TAYLOR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/eGov/taylorpdf/06-10204Injunction.pdf

[Jack Rabbit]

17. !!

From , Kansas City, Kansas

[BR_Parkway]

18. Judge nixes warrantless surveillance

DETROIT - A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.
ADVERTISEMENT

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.

The
American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs. They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, which involves secretly taping conversations between people in the U.S. and people in other countries.

The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060817/ap_on_go_pr_wh/warrantless_surveillance

[sinkingfeeling]

19. Glad I'm a card-carrying member of the ACLU!

[BR_Parkway]

21. I'm filling out my donation form at this moment

[stlsaxman]

79. Me too! Yippie!!!!!

My "tenner"/month has paid off in spades!


:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[mconvente]

20. ALL RIGHT!!

Best news I've heard in a long time!!

[MercutioATC]

22. But what does that MEAN???

(in practical terms)

I'm assuming the government will appeal. What actual changes will come from this ruling?

(It's an honest question...I don't know all of the steps these things take)

[Kagemusha]

26. It means an EMERGENCY appeal to the Supreme Court

citing national security needs in a time of wahr.

[BR_Parkway]

31. Don't forget all the "activist judges" braying on hate radio network

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

54. One problem with that

No formal declaration of war has been issued by Congress.. Not in Afghanistan, not in Iraq, not ANYWHERE.

[Kagemusha]

59. You know that and I know that...

I guess you haven't heard me explain this to people before. As Bush sees it, there's Al Qaeda on US soil. US has therefore been invaded. President therefore has unlimited war powers to repel the invasion. End of story.

[BR_Parkway]

27. It means that a higher court would have to overturn, but it's now

been declared illegal by a US Federal Court and they've been ordered to stop - it's a crime to continue

(I beleive that it was criminal in the first place, but now that a court has declared it so, there's much more teeth in the arguement)

[Say_What]

28. Means that *some* judges still have the cojones to protect our rights. n/t

[TomInTib]

29. The gov will appeal in order to buy time for Congress..

to soften the law.

This will blow up in their collective face before November as Frist and Hastert attempt to ram this through.

[pnwmom]

52. But the impossible challenge for them will be figuring out

how to pass a law that is acceptable to Bush AND is Constitutional.

[Jack Rabbit]

23. The Constitution is alive and well

A bit soiled for being used as a neoconservative doormat, but alive and well.

[jazzjunkysue]

75. Soiled is right. Let's wipe the chimp's ass with it. Till he bleeds.

[Norquist Nemesis]

24. Just saw this on CNN breaking banner!

Now need to google Judge Diggs Taylor...

[bigwillq]

30. I saw it too on CNN

but I guess Jon Benet is still more important. :eyes:

[Norquist Nemesis]

44. Finally turned it off

and tuned in to Thom Hartmann. Conyers on now talking about this.

[NYC Liberal]

35. Appointed by Carter...

http://www.daahp.wayne.edu/biographiesDisplay.asp?id=64

An attorney and judge, Anna Diggs Taylor was the first African-American woman appointed to a federal judgeship in Michigan and later became the first African-American woman to be named chief federal judge in the Eastern District of Michigan. Taylor has used her positions to advance civil rights throughout the United States.

......

Taylor became active in politics, helping Coleman Young in his 1973 campaign and Jimmy Carter in his 1976 victory. After Young's election, Taylor was named special counsel to the City of Detroit and then in 1975 accepted the full time position as assistant corporation counsel for the city. She successfully defended new city policies that established affirmative action hiring practices and outlawed discrimination in two private yacht clubs located on city-owned Belle Isle. Taylor became the first African-American women named to a Michigan federal court on November 15, 1979, when she was sworn in as a federal judge to the U.S. District Court for the Eastren District of Michigan. In 1997 she became the first African-American woman to be named chief judge of Eastern District of the United States District Court. 

[Norquist Nemesis]

42. Thanks!

:hi:

[NotGivingUp]

25. this is so wonderful!

[The Witch]

32. Where's the damn BUBBLY!?!?!??!

:toast: :toast: :toast: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :party: :party: :party: :headbang: :woohoo: :applause:

Et cetera, ad nauseam!

[EFerrari]

36. When I saw the thread in GD, I thought it was a spoof!

:)

[redqueen]

33. Nicely done judge Taylor!

:thumbsup:

And pardom me, but re: the decision - um, DUH!

[E-Z-B]

34. A judge saved the 4th Ammendment to the U.S. Constitution

They same constitution that our "president" vowed to uphold.

[Norquist Nemesis]

41. Here's hoping SCOTUS does the same

I honestly don't understand why the fraidycats don't get it and try to immediately attack our patriotism. They just can't seem to get it through their peabrains that the bottom line of the criticsm is warrentless, not wiretapping.

[Roy]

61. They are fully aware of that!

It's not about wire tapping nor the constitution with those who follow these corrupt pols.

It's about winning at all cost, annihilating a perceived 'enemy' even at the cost of personal economic suicide. After all, they can absolve themselves of responsibility by blaming the enemy that they hate so much.

They are just a milder form of suicide bombers.

[coalition_unwilling]

70. The reason they didn't want warrants, even though said warrants

were readily available through FISA mechanism, is so that they could spy on political opponents, just like Nixon did. Why this isn't mentioned as the most likely possibility by MSM is beyond me.

[Roy]

86. No, it is not beyond you, probably like most, you wish it were.

It is obvious, MSM are willing partners.

[tridim]

38. I'd love to see the police burst into the NSA NOC

and start ripping cables out of the computers.

How else are they going to verify they've complied with the order? Take their word? This is something that MUST be enforced.

[bobthedrummer]

39. Let's give credit to Russ Feingold for stating that BFEE AG Gonzales

"misled" Congress on domestic surveillance while we're mentioning political leaders opposed to the "decider's" fascism.

[baldguy]

40. Judge Taylor must be an al Queda mole.

She obviously hates us for our freedom.

:sarcasm:

[truthisfreedom]

43. wow. bushco screwed themselves when they went on the defensive

in the press about this... "The ACLU said the state-secrets argument was irrelevant because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule."

[Kagemusha]

45. Yes, Bush's own words probably helped kill his program.

Good thing too.

[jazzjunkysue]

76. Right. I think there's hope that the supremes will uphold.

This is just really disgusting,and they know it. I think this is different from abortion and gay rights. This is about presidential power, not values.This is too close to their hearts to allow it.

[Rhiannon12866]

46. Good news! K&R. CNN link:

NSA eavesdropping program ruled unconstitutional

Judge orders immediate halt to program

Thursday, August 17, 2006; Posted: 12:14 p.m. EDT (16:14 GMT)

DETROIT, Michigan (AP) -- A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/17/domesticspying.lawsuit.ap/index.html

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

47. NSA eavesdropping program ruled unconstitutional

From cnn.com

<snip>

DETROIT, Michigan (AP) -- A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs. They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, which involves secretly taping conversations between people in the U.S. and people in other countries.

The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.

<snip>

[seafan]

48. Get a load of what the GOP said on August 11:

Bush Aides Foresee Gains on Eavesdropping and Guantánamo

By JIM RUTENBERG
Published: August 12, 2006

CRAWFORD, Tex., Aug. 11 — White House officials said Friday that the fallout from the discovery of the British bombing plot could help the administration advance its agenda in Congress. The officials cited in particular battles over supervising the program of eavesdropping without warrants and how to try detainees held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Taking the White House’s lead, Republicans throughout the country used the arrests of terror suspects in Britain to go on the offensive against Democrats for the second day in a row. They accused Democrats of failing to understand the nature of the terrorist threat facing the nation.

snip

Insisting on anonymity, a senior administration official in Washington said .... the arrests in Britain would also help the White House secure its compromise with Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, allowing a secret intelligence court to review the legality of its conducting wiretaps without warrants on Americans suspected of having ties to terrorists.

snip

Since the plot in Britain was disclosed, Republicans have been trying to focus attention on the debate and to draw a sharp distinction with what they characterize as a soft, overly legalistic approach by Democrats.

Hey, what happened to "Rule of law! Rule of Law! Rule of Law"!!!?

“The question all of us should be asking today is how much longer can we afford Democrat obstruction and opposition to important national security efforts that will make our nation and its citizens more secure,” Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, said in a statement Thursday.

Mr. Cornyn was referring in part to Democratic complaints about the wiretap program.

In an interview on Friday, a spokesman for Speaker J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, Ron Bonjean, said the discovery of the terrorism plot “helps us push for stronger surveillance monitoring of terrorist movements.”

snip

“I have no doubt that the administration will use this most recent terrorist plot as an additional argument for anything it wants to obtain in the war on terrorism,” Mr. (Adam B. Schiff, a California Democrat) said. “But as a practical matter, they’ve never shown why they can’t constitutionally conduct surveillance in a way that protects the country.”

It is now laid bare for all to see that the pressure *Co put on the British to publicize their terror investigation was intended for political ammunition to bolster *Co's case to do whatever they damn well please, to anyone, anywhere, at any time.


*Co now has a very serious problem.

A people's judge has just ruled against them, declaring that their actions against the people's Constitution are illegal. This is an historical moment.




The Rule of Law just rescued part of our Constitution from these desperadoes. Now let's listen to them scream.

These guys better lawyer up _F_A_S_T_ because they are going down.

It's only a matter of time, now.


U.S. federal judge rules warrantless wiretapping unconstitutional, August 17, 2006


(All emphasis added)

[cgrindley]

49. Yay!

I'm thinking that it'll hold. I hope I'm right.

[pnwmom]

50. article from "Jurist" (Pittsburgh School of Law)-- link to opinion

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2006/08/breaking-news-federal-judge-rules.php

AP is reporting that US District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor has ruled that the Bush administration's domestic surveillance program is unconstitutional and has ordered the National Security Agency to immediately cease using warrantless wiretaps to intercept communications of suspected terrorists when one party to the communication is outside the US. Diggs ruled that the NSA wiretaps violate free speech and privacy rights.

12:21 PM ET - Read the opinion and judgment and permanent injunction order .

12:29 PM ET - Diggs' ruling comes in a lawsuit filed by the ACLU on behalf of journalists, scholars, attorneys and national nonprofit organizations having "a well-founded belief that their communications are being intercepted by the NSA." The US Justice Department argued that the case should be dismissed because defending it in court would jeopardize national security. In June Diggs denied a government motion to stay consideration of an ACLU motion for partial summary judgment on state secrecy grounds.

In her opinion Thursday, Diggs wrote:
Defendants assert that they cannot defend this case without the exposure of state secrets. This court disagrees. The Bush Administration has repeatedly told the general public that there is a valid basis in law for the TSP . Further, Defendants have contended that the President has the authority under the AUMF and the Constitution to authorize the continued use of the TSP. Defendants have supported these arguments without revealing or relying on any classified information. Indeed, the court has reviewed the classified information and is of the opinion that this information is not necessary to any viable defense to the TSP. Defendants have presented support for the argument that "it . . is well-established that the President may exercise his statutory and constitutional authority to gather intelligence information about foreign enemies." Defendants cite to various sources to support this position. Consequently, the court finds Defendants' argument that they cannot defend this case without the use of classified information to be disingenuous and without merit.

[williesgirl]

51. King George will ignore this - how will we prove they continued?

[pnwmom]

53. We'll need whistleblowers, probably

but at least this would give them a reason to blow.

[QuettaKid]

55. K&R . nt.

.

[BluePatriot]

56. Wooooo!!!

Now let's see some enforcement, though (yeah right...)

[BadGimp]

57. DU the poll!!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14394523/

Do you agree with the judge's ruling that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional? * 17056 responses

Yes, warrantless wiretapping is an invasion of my privacy.
61%

No, the practice is not unconstitutional. I am willing to sacrifice some civil liberties in the name of security.
39%

[jazzjunkysue]

77. Got it: Still 61-39 for democracy.

[teryang]

82. Response #2 makes no sense, it's a slogan, not a choice

If the practice is not unconstitutional, then there is no such civil liberty to be "sacrificed."

Response number two is a slogan devoid of meaning, attempting to provide a motive to "sacrifice" rights that one does not have, if the practice of warrantless eavesdropping is constitutional.

One either believes that there is a constitutional right to be free from warrantless search or that such a right doesn't exist.

[Placebo]

60. ACTIVIST JUDGES!

Damn them all! They're abusing their freedom to decide legal things.

:crazy:

[Seabiscuit]

83. Repukes only call judges "activist" when they rule against their agenda.

n/t

[Ragin_mad]

62. How long until the NSA provides equipment to the British

and let them do the spying for them. Or outsource it to India ?

[Marie26]

63. Woo-hooooo!

I mean, everyone knew it was unconstitutional, but it's so nice to hear a judge finally rule that. This gives me hope. :bounce:

[catlawyer]

64. CNN Breaking re: Govt appeal

"The U.S. Department of Justice has announced that it will appeal a federal judge's ruling that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional."

[truthisfreedom]

66. i can't wait for this to go before the supremes.

who will have to recuse themselves?

[Blackhatjack]

65. Next Step, Summon them before grand juries and investigate further

...telling them to cease and desist is the correct decisions by the Fed Dist Ct Judge. Now the ball in Congress' court, since the DOJ has previously abdicated any role in holding them accountable.

If the constitution has been violated, wilfully and intentionally, for over 5 years, it is about time to expose the dirty work done through the power of the subpoena.

Those of us old enough to remember will recall the outrage when the "Enemies List" was published, and shocked at the names and number of people spied upon by the Nixon henchmen. This will not stop unless there is a similar disclosure in this warrantless spying program.

[don954]

67. WOOT! Good day for America!

at least this small victory shows some progress to pull us back from the brink of fascism.

[BigDDem]

69. The Constitution

hates our freedom.

[Canuckistanian]

71. Notice the government never uses the word "warrant"?

They're trying to make this sound like wiretapping itself is being called unconstitutional.

This plays right into the hands of the RW talking heads at Fox and the Rush/Hannity/Coulter types.

[AnneD]

72. About time some one woke up

Of, course this means it goes to the SCOTUS, and well, we know what kind of power Bush will walk away with. Hope Bush wins this round...And DEMS win the ELECTIONS and control of Congress and presidency.:rofl:

[FreeStateDemocrat]

73. CNN spinning Puke line only where is our leadership to counter this?

WH and Justice, unnamed puke legislative asst saying the pukes will "paint the Dems as being weak on terror" and not one fucking word from any Dem spokesperson, How dumb and pathetic is our leadership not to be out in front of this in the way the pukes always do by responding on time and with bad intentions and bury our party before the debate even begins.

[Sapere aude]

81. Many times the Dems are not invited to the discussion.

[Seabiscuit]

85. Several of our Dems have already blasted Bush about this... they're just

not invited to the 'puke-fest on CNN.

[katty]

74. bush on his SLIPPERY SLOPE......down, down, down

[fujiyama]

78. This is certainly good news

but is a great temporary roadblock at best.

As we know the government has appealed already. My question is though, will this next go to an appeals court or will it go straight to the USSC?

Either way, when would be the closest for congress to take the issue up and pass a bill authorizing what Bush did, adding a fake "sense of oversight" to the process?

Maybe someone could answer those questions.

[Vidar]

80. Good for Judge Taylor.

[Seabiscuit]

84. 'Scuse me, George, but "There are no hereditary kings in America."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2785201&mesg_id=2785201