The Bill of Rights Exists: An Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein

[xchrom]

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/06/07


Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) acknowledge that the top secret court order for telephone records of millions of U.S. customers of Verizon is a three-month renewal of an ongoing practice. (Photo: AP file)

Dear Senator Feinstein:

On Thursday, when you responded to news about massive ongoing surveillance of phone records of people in the United States, you slipped past the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. As the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, you seem to be in the habit of treating the Bill of Rights as merely advisory.

The Constitution doesn’t get any better than this: “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.”

The greatness of the Fourth Amendment explains why so many Americans took it to heart in civics class, and why so many of us treasure it today. But along with other high-ranking members of Congress and the president of the United States, you have continued to chip away at this sacred bedrock of civil liberties.

As The Guardian reported the night before your sudden news conference, the leaked secret court order “shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of U.S. citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk—regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.”

[kentuck]

1. Dianne Feinstein and Lindsey Graham have no problem with it because....

that would be an admission that they were wrong. They are their own judge and jury. I prefer to let someone else make that judgement.

[cascadiance]

2. I'm so much happier with my newer senators (Merkley and Wyden) than the likes of DiFi I use to have.

Wyden might have made a mistake or two like with Medicare crap he did with Paul Ryan, but at least he's been pretty consistent and diligent in other areas like protecting our rights of privacy and a leader in that area. DiFi has no real areas of positives that I could get my hands around to find some way of supporting her. Even with the potential of her supporting gun legislation to get rid of assault weapons, was arguably more political theater on her part than a real effort to enact some new laws, as she and Barbara Boxer both stood in the way of my other Senator Merkley's efforts to put in a talking filibuster rule change that would arguably stop Republican obstructionism, that arguably would have HELPED her pass this bill instead of having it obstructed. Since she didn't help with the filibuster rule changes, one can only come to the conclusion that perhaps she didn't care or maybe even WANTED it to be obstructed by Republicans from moving forward and potentially becoming real law. I'm also amazed that Barbara Boxer, who in the past I've supported for so many things would also support the political theater enabling filibuster rules (or lack thereof) that are in place now that prevent decent legislation from moving forward instead of the Merkley/Harkin rules that would have helped Democrats move legislation forward in the Senate.