How bad is it?

Thanks to a rush-job from Congress, and some help from a couple of dozen craven Dem lawmakers, the president signed into law yesterday a new bill that offers him broad surveillance powers, including the ability to eavesdrop on American citizens’ international communications without a warrant.

How bad is the new law? Details are a little sketchy — not surprising, given the classified subject matter — but it appears all the illegal activities the administration was engaged in have now been made legal.

Congressional aides and others familiar with the details of the law said that its impact went far beyond the small fixes that administration officials had said were needed to gather information about foreign terrorists. They said seemingly subtle changes in legislative language would sharply alter the legal limits on the government’s ability to monitor millions of phone calls and e-mail messages going in and out of the United States.

They also said that the new law for the first time provided a legal framework for much of the surveillance without warrants that was being conducted in secret by the National Security Agency and outside the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the 1978 law that is supposed to regulate the way the government can listen to the private communications of American citizens.

Whereas the law previously insisted that the administration get FISA Court-approved search warrants to eavesdrop on communications involving Americans citizens on U.S. soil, this new law changes the landscape. If the federal government wants to spy on someone, and the target is “reasonably believed” to be overseas, a warrant is no longer necessary.

And the “target” need not be a suspected terrorist. If the administration believes a U.S.-to-foreign conversation might serve some kind of intelligence-gathering purpose, it can go ahead and eavesdrop without oversight.

The consequences are rather startling.

For example, if a person in Indianapolis calls someone in London, the National Security Agency can eavesdrop on that conversation without a warrant, as long as the N.S.A.’s target is the person in London.

Tony Fratto, a White House spokesman, said Sunday in an interview that the new law went beyond fixing the foreign-to-foreign problem, potentially allowing the government to listen to Americans calling overseas.

But he stressed that the objective of the new law is to give the government greater flexibility in focusing on foreign suspects overseas, not to go after Americans.

“It’s foreign, that’s the point,” Mr. Fratto said. “What you want to make sure is that you are getting the foreign target.”

And what about the safeguards in place while the administration is spying on the foreign target? Well, surveillance is now approved by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence, instead of the special intelligence court. FISA judges will now “review and approve the procedures used by the government in the surveillance after it has been conducted. It will not scrutinize the cases of the individuals being monitored.”

Better yet, the AG and DNI can now force telecommunications companies to cooperate with such spying operations, without pesky legal burdens and court orders.

For more on the bill, I’d encourage readers to check out this item from my friend publius, this from Orin Kerr, and this from Marty Lederman, all of which offer valuable and helpful insights.

I’d just add this: for Congress to carelessly give Bush these kinds of powers is asking for abuse and a grand scale. Lawmakers who voted for it ought to be ashamed.

Any chance the FISA court – or a non-secret court for that matter – will declare the new law unconstitutional on search and seizure or privacy grounds? Has anyone heard of any challenges being prepared yet?

  • Lawmakers who voted for it ought to be ashamed.

    Lawmakers who voted for it ought to be afraid. That fence they want to build won’t be to keep people out. It will keep people in when they try to escape this country.

  • Add this to the ‘Patriot Act’ & the ‘Military Commissions Act of 2006’ & the ‘right’ given to Bush to declare Military Law & the removal of control of National Guards from the governors & Bush’s unilateral declaration that he can seize the property of anyone he deems as ‘hurting the Iraq war’ & all of Bush’s signing statements that ‘overrule’ laws passed by Congress – I am so thoroughly disgusted by our politicians, both Repugnican & Dumbocrat, that I believe that the only solution available is to REMOVE ALL OF THEM!

  • Maybe the ACLU will step up to the plate on this one.

    Now that Bush can continue with his unconstitutional spying on citizens, we know who to blame in addition to him, Cheney, Gonzo & Co. — every single legislator who voted for the bill.

  • Maybe the ACLU will step up to the plate on this one.

    They did on the last round, but the courts ruled that since the spying is secret,
    nobody knows if they are being spied upon therefore cannont claim to be damaged,
    therefore cannont claim standing and have not right to sue. Very convenient.

    Aside to site administrator: Using Safari 1.3, the comment box does not autowrap.

  • So, then any communication on the internet can be spied upon, since it can be accessed world-wide. Fascist pigs.

    Yawohl!

  • but nancy and harry are gonna fix it….

    the friggin cowardice of these bastards makes me nuts. knowing everything they know about the corruption of the justice department, they’ve just given all the authority abu gonzo could ever want to spy on americans without consequence.

    cowards. friggin cowards.l

  • “I’d just add this: for Congress to carelessly give Bush these kinds of powers is asking for abuse and a grand scale.”

    What will Bush actually do with these “grand scale abuses” that everyone here is so afraid of?

  • I agree with SmilingDixie (#3) – no one deserves financial support OR re-election. The “support Bush” votes were an abomination (not to mention a violation of their oath). But the “oppose Bush” buttheads simply have done enough to change the course of this country or the Democratic Party. At the very least, they all need a sound thumping next time out. This country and our party seem to have forgotten their revolutionary, Jeffersonian roots. Cowardly, greedy bastards!

  • The Democratic Senatorial “Repeal of the Fourth Amendment” Wall of Shame:

    * Evan Bayh (Hillary’s BFF)
    * Tom Carper
    * Bob Casey
    * Kent Conrad
    * Dianne Feinstein
    * Daniel Inouye
    * Amy Klobuchar
    * Mary Landrieu
    * Blanche Lincoln
    * Claire McCaskill
    * Barbara Mikulski
    * Bill Nelson
    * Ben Nelson
    * Mark Pryor
    * Ken Salazar
    * Jim Webb

  • Lawmakers who voted for it ought to be ashamed.

    Lawmakers who voted for it ought to be run out of town on a f–king rail. To think these morons just gave that kind of power to the guy who has sat in their chamber and LIED TO THEM FOR THE LAST MONTH and won’t even confirm or deny the intelligence gathering already underway boggles the mind.

    I am so disgusted with the Democratic Party right now I cannot even put it in words. I think I’d rather not have won back the Congress—then this wouldn’t be so disappointing.

  • It occurred to me this morning as I was driving in to work, that in passing this bill, the Congress effectively removed illegal surveillance activities as one of the issues in any impeachment proceeding that might be considered or undertaken, and maybe that was one of the underlying reasons the administration was so anxious to get the bill passed. You can argue that legalizing something now does not make prior illegal acts legal, but if the people accusing you of the crime are the ones who agreed with you that it ought to be legal, I don’t think that one’s going anywhere, do you?

    As for those who continue to believe that if they aren’t doing anything wrong, they have no reason to be afraid, I would ask them to consider that we no longer have the same expectation of being considered innocent until proven guilty, of having access to the legal system or even knowing the charges against us, if someone decides that we represent a threat to national security. They no longer need a reason to spirit you away, and by giving them the tools to gain access to all of your personal information – without your ever knowing they have it, or making them prove they need it – we have removed more of the protections we thought were Constitutionally guaranteed.

    If that doesn’t send chills up your spine, perhaps you don’t have one, either.

  • I’m glad the GOP members provided such strong support for this bill. Soon, the power to eavesdrop on all communications will be in the hands of President Clinton.

    Retribution will follow shortly.

    And I can hardly wait.

  • So has the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 been pretty much nullfied?
    Not only with this new legislation, but also with the Military Commissions Act from last year?

    I’m asking this because the NSA is an agency of the Department of Defense, and they are prohibited from having any law enforcement power in the US, except in a “support” role. (as I recall, this was a huge deal among conservatives because of the presence of US military personnel and equipment during the Branch Davidian standoff).

    I know somebody here could enlighten me, because I’m having a hell of a time trying to figure this issue out.

  • So, was the Invertebrate Party’s performance spinelessness or collusion? Remember that the Harlem Globetrotters and the Washington Generals were all part of the same show, even when the Generals occasionally won. This show is no longer very amusing, I’ve decided to stop buying any more tickets.

  • CB: Pretty good post, especially considering that a lot of your posts copy pretty closely what Political Animal and some other blogs are doing. Not all of us can be really outstanding, but when we have our one moment every once in a while to succeed on our own merits, it is thrilling.

  • Good news! After my rant on the Sunday discussion group about my worthless DINO congressman who voted for this bill, I learned that he is doing a series of “town hall” meetings around the district this week. I will be attending the one near me, and I will be asking him publicly how much more of the Bill of Rights he considers to be negotiable whenever Bush waves the bloody shirt of 9/11 in front of the Congress. The Second Amendment is especially popular around here.

    Is your DINO congressman or senator holding a town meeting near you during this summer recess? If so, why not drop in? I’m sure he or she would enjoy meeting you.

    By the way, I have already called my Congressman’s Washington office and written to him. Please do the same if you haven’t done it already.

  • Soon, the power to eavesdrop on all communications will be in the hands of President Clinton.

    No sane man cuts a switch and hands it to another to beat him with.

    A party does not make sweeping changes to the fundamental, organic law of a country that would inevitably redound to its disadvantage upon its return to opposition unless it was pretty sure that it was never going to return to opposition again.

  • Remember how, every once in awhile, the big department store in your home town (Stedman’s, where I grew up) would raise their prices a little bit, on just about everything? Then after a week or two, they’d bring them back down to their previous level, and put up a sign that said “SALE!!”

    There’s something about this that has the same smell. You can be sure that, for all their squeals of protest (and for some, there hasn’t even been that), subsequent governments are going to want to keep these powers. If they back off ever so little, not even taking things back to where they were before, they can say that the law on warrantless wiretapping is now stricter, so Americans can breathe easy again.

    On the bright side, you’re getting to watch nostalgia being made. In the same sense that we will never again see 80-cent gasoline, we’ll never again see eavesdropping laws that are transparent and accountable. There’ll always be an element of “trust us” from political parties that are so in bed with each other that you can hardly tell them apart. Seriously, if Hillary Clinton didn’t self-identify as a Democrat, could you tell her from a Republican based on her rhetoric?

  • My congresscritter was on the side of the angels but my senator shook hands with the devil and just got a scathing email from me about it. What the hell was Webb doing on that hall of shame list? He seems to see this administration for the trainwreck it is and then gives them this? Odd.

  • That’s the whole point isn’t it. It’s not what we’re doing but who we are doing it with. Bush and Gonzales have proven not to be responsible with the powers granted them in the past. Bush has lost all credibility and Gonzales is beyond repair. The outrage from the citizens toward them is so great that they want congress to give Bush nothing, no matter what he asks for, no matter how much he bullies or blackmails to get legislation…nothing, simply because it’s Bush…it’s Gonzales whom we would just as soon have impeached and jailed.

    If there is a way to abuse it or misuse it they will.

  • Does anyone really believe anymore that the Democrats are spineless?

    It looks like they did exactly what they wanted to do with the Friday vote

  • Comments are closed.