[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Editorial See other Editorial Articles Title: A Detroit Judge with Backbone; Standing Up To Bush's Wanton Dismissal Of The Bill of Rights August 18, 2006 A Detroit judge succeeded Thursday where Congress has so far failed -- standing up to the Bush administration's wanton dismissal of the Bill of Rights. U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor declared the administration's secret spying program unconstitutional and blocked the government from intercepting calls into this country from abroad that might involve terrorists without getting warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Taylor made no bones about what was at stake. "It was never the intent of the framers to give the president such unfettered control, particularly where his actions blatantly disregard the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights," Taylor wrote. Later in the 44-page decision she concluded: "The public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution." No one had to prove they were actually spied upon, either. Several individuals and groups, represented by the ACLU, said they had lost the ability to have conversations with friends, families and professional contacts overseas, particularly in Arab countries, since the spying came to light. That violates their First Amendment freedoms of expression and association, their Fourth Amendment rights to be secure in their persons, and the principle of separation of powers. "The three separate branches of government were developed as a check and balance for one another," Taylor wrote. "It is within the court's duty to ensure that power is never 'condense(d) ... into a single branch of government.' " It's within Congress' duty, too, but the Republican-controlled legislative branch has yet to rein in the Republican-controlled White House, citing the need to do "everything possible in the war on terror." But as former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said before her retirement this year, the war doesn't entitle the president to a "blank check." The administration immediately notified Taylor it would appeal, and she will not enforce her injunction immediately. But the message was loud and clear. The Constitution still matters. How many times will the Bush administration have to hear that until it finally believes it?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||