AP photo: Stop illegal wiretapping; Bush broke the law

[ProSense]

Thu Feb 23, 2:47 AM ET
A demonstrator who did not want to be identified displays signs during a protest of the Bush administration's domestic wiretapping program. A controversial constitutional expert defended the White House's powers to authorize warrantless spying on Americans(AFP/Getty Images/Tim Boyle)


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060223/photos_wl_afp/060222213200_pskvgtvk_photo0

Wed Feb 22, 8:03 PM ET
Melanie Wainfor, 9, right, and her mother, Carrie, of Fredericksburg, Va., read the Bill of Rights along with other participants during a candlelight vigil in Dumfries, Va., Wednesday, Feb. 22, 2006. Participants want Congress to demand an investigation of President Bush's controversial domestic spying program. (AP Photo/Potomac News, Ana Pimsler)



http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060223/480/vawoo10102230107

[mahatmakanejeeves]

1. Link to WaPo article about John Yoo at Heritage Foundation

A War of Words: 'Declare' vs. 'Make' and Its Allies

By Dana Milbank
Thursday, February 23, 2006; Page A02

For generations, civics students have learned that the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. Yesterday, the man who built the legal underpinnings of the Bush administration's terrorism strategy revised the curriculum.

John Yoo, the former Justice Department official whose writings justified the administration's treatment of military prisoners and the National Security Agency eavesdropping program, announced that Congress's warmaking powers are just a figment of the "popular imagination."

[ProSense]

2. Lawyers dissect Bush's argument; show he doesn't have unchecked authority

Why the President's Defense of Executive Power to Wiretap Without Warrants Can't Succeed in the Strict Constructionist Court He Wants

By VIKRAM AMAR AND ALAN BROWNSTEIN
----
Friday, Feb. 17, 2006

A few months ago, President Bush said he picked Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito largely because he considers them "strict constructionists." In the President's words, "e've got to make sure . . . to have people who serve on the bench who are not going to try to legislate, but who will strictly interpret the Constitution." The President's message was clear: Justices should narrowly apply the law as it exists - derived from non-judicial sources like text, history and unbroken societal tradition - rather than "create" law in the context of adjudicating disputes.

Article here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2470978&mesg_id=2470978