CIVIL LIBERTIES  
comments_image -

Congress, Step Up and Start Defending the Constitution

The Democrats' capitulation on FISA is a triumph of Congressional self-importance over the guardianship of our Constitutional rights.
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email.

 
 
 
 

Imagine yourself as the parent of a willful, destructive child who lives to break things. Every rattle -- split. Every cup -- cracked. Every toy -- destroyed. Every stuffed animal -- ripped to shreds. All of this behavior is punctuated by continued whining and crying when objects presented to him somehow don't work any more.

Why then, on God's green earth, would any parent give the child a priceless vase, knowing it will be reduced to shards in a few moment's time, even if those few moments are a respite between tantrums?

I wouldn't. You wouldn't. But the Congress of the United States will. The passage by the House last week, and the expected passage by the Senate this week, of the latest assault on our Constitution is nothing more than trying to take the easy way out by rewarding bad behavior. It's a triumph of Congressional self-importance over the guardianship of our rights.

The Democratic "leadership" wanted a bill President Bush would sign. That was the bottom line. It wouldn't matter if the Constitution got trashed. It wouldn't matter if the government was given too much authority. These "legislators" had to legislate, or else they would be made to look bad by a president whose policies are now opposed by about 80 percent of the American people. Heaven forbid there's no new legislation and the government has to operate with the authority already in place. How would that look? To some people, just fine. On the other hand, while the House "leadership" basks in its legislative glories, the Republicans go preening to the press on how they snookered the other side. They are only partially right. It's not fooling someone if that person knows what's going on is stupid yet participates willingly. That's what happened here.

Of course it's not only the "leadership" who were behind this travesty. The whining, self-important "Blue Dogs," Democrats from "conservative" districts also pushed for it so they can flaunt their credentials as tough on terrorists and strong on defense. Come on, little Blue Puppies. It's time to "man up" and to "woman up" on this. Try defending the Constitution for a change. Quit whimpering and hiding and defend freedom and the document to which you swore an oath to protect and to defend.

It was evident to anyone looking at the bill that the legislation took the idea of a warrant out of the hands of the most indulgent court in the land -- the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court that grants every request for a wiretap. It's simply a matter that the authorities can't be bothered with the niceties any more. Never mind that existing law allows for wiretapping now, with a warrant soon after.

No, the Executive Branch got something more. Rather than have a court review whether a wiretap is necessary, this new bill only allows a court to decide whether it had been correctly requested. The wiretap is presumed to be legal by the people ordering the wiretap. There's a bit of circular logic there. The emergency wiretapping can only take place under "exigent circumstances," which, in theory, are to happen only rarely. As Rep. James Langevin (D-RI) put it during the House debate: "This legislation will only work if everyone involved follows the rules and remains within the confines of the law."

Langevin raises the relevant point here. Who, exactly, are we rewarding with this new authority, and what have they done to deserve it? Let's go down the ever-increasing and depressing list. It's not like anyone can forget what was going on at DoJ. We are reminded every day by some new disclosure that the Department became more politicized than at any time in its history. We can start with hiring lawyers based on ideology. We can continue with firing U.S. Attorneys because they decline to file bogus voter-fraud cases against Democratic candidates. How about dropping or settling big law suits against special interests? And then, the big kahuna, spying on American citizens without warrants or authorization, knowing that it was likely illegal but doing it anyway. This was the program that even John Ashcroft refused to approve from his hospital bed. That's the shorthand. Eric Lichtblau's excellent book, Bush's Law: The Remaking of American Justice, lays it all out. News stories every day now tell the stories of the Kyles, Monicas, Bradleys and the rest of the kiddies remaking the Justice Department in their own image. There might be grown-ups in charge now, but the doctrine remains the same.

submit to reddit

-
Email
Print
Share
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email
Advertisement
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading most read content ..
Advertisement
Fox, Breitbart, and Ricketts Try to Bring Back D'Souza's Pseudo-Birtherism

By Steve M | No More Mister Nice Blog

 
 
Activists Speak Out Against Lack of Access to Bradley Manning

By Agence France Presse

 
 
NYPD Catches Sexual Assailant, Then Lets Him Go Free Because He Didn't Feel Like Being Questioned

By Jill F | Feministe

 
 
Gov. Scott Orders Purging of Florida’s Voter Rolls - Just in Time For Prez Election

By Adele Stan | Washington Monthly

 
 
Abortion Clinics Across Country Put On Alert In Wake of Georgia Clinic Arson Cases

By Robin Marty | RH Reality Check

 
 
Former GOP Congresswoman Blasts New GOP Women’s Caucus: ‘They’re Not Voting In Best Interest Of All Women’

By Josh Israel | ThinkProgress

 
 
Debbie Wasserman Schulz is Wrong on Wisconsin

By LaFeminista | DailyKos

 
 
Pro-Coal Group Pays People to Wear Its Shirts at EPA Hearing

By Heather Moyer | Sierra Club

 
 
Kids Inundate NY Governor With Concerns About Fracking

By Seth Gladstone | Food and Water Watch

 
 
Shareholders, Top Doctors Demand McDonald's Assess its Health Impacts

By Sara Deon | Civil Eats

 
 
 
 
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
 
[ page served from web 1 ]