You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

New BUSHCO Docs Reveal How Yoo Eliminated 4th Amendment So Cheney Could Wiretap Illegally [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-19-11 10:54 AM
Original message
New BUSHCO Docs Reveal How Yoo Eliminated 4th Amendment So Cheney Could Wiretap Illegally
Advertisements [?]
Newly Released OLC Opinion Reveals How Yoo Relied on Eliminating Fourth Amendment to Wiretap Illegally
By: emptywheel Saturday March 19, 2011 7:05 am-According To Yoo It's The 4th Amendment That's Quaint

As Josh Gerstein http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0311/Justice_Department_details_legal_blessing_of_warrantless_wiretapping_in_2004.html?showall and Jack Goldsmith http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/03/doj-releases-redacted-version-of-2004-surveillance-opinion/ note, DOJ just released two of the opinions underlying the warrantless wiretap programs. They both focus on the May 6, 2004 opinion https://webspace.utexas.edu/rmc2289/OLC%2054.FINAL.PDF Goldsmith wrote in the wake of the hospital confrontation; I’ll have far more to say about that opinion later today and/or tomorrow.

But I wanted to look at what the highly redacted opinion John Yoo wrote on November 2, 2001 tells us.

The opinion is so completely redacted we only get snippets. Those snippets are, in part:

FISA only provides safe harbor for electronic surveillance, and cannot restrict the President’s ability to engage in warrantless searches that protect the national security.

..............

Thus, unless Congress made a clear statement that it sought to restrict presidential authority to conduct warrantless searches in the national security area–which it has not–then the statute must be construed to avoid such a reading.

..................
intelligence gathering in direct support of military operations does not trigger constitutional rights against illegal searches and seizures.

...................

A warrantless search can be constitutional “when special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement, make the warrant and probable-cause requirement impracticable.”


................

Cheney’s illegal wiretapping program was totally legal. What you didn’t know, though, is that the Fourth Amendment is just a quaint artifact of time before 9/11.

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2011/03/19/newly-released-olc-opinion-reveals-how-yoo-relied-on-eliminating-fourth-amendment-to-wiretap-illegally/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC