“While it’s true that O’Connor has tended to vote with the majority more frequently than Kennedy, and that she has done so in some big 5-4 decisions, it’s also true that in other extremely contentious areas, it is Kennedy, not O’Connor, who has swung the court leftward.” As Dem begin to announce their no votes for Alito (while downplaying the likelihood of a filibuster), Dahlia Lithwick — who is concerned about Alito’s judgment in the relatively precedent-less world of anti-terror-law — gives us hope for the Court’s future in highlighting Anthony Kennedy as the new swing vote. (Clearly, the psycho-right despises him, which speaks well of his jurisprudence in my book.)
Tag: War on Terror
Another law broken.
The non-partisan Congressional Research Service finds — again — that Dubya’s warrantless wiretapping was illegal. In this case, the Dubya White House violated the 1947 National Security Act, by neglecting to inform the entire House and Senate intelligence committees of their shenanigans. Put it in the impeachment file, Sen. Specter.
Photo Opportunities (and shots at redemption).
“The president of the United States has been breaking the law repeatedly and insistently…A president who breaks the law is a threat to the very structure of our government.” I’ve had my issues with the guy, but, y’know, when he’s right, he’s right. As the ACLU and Center for Constitutional Liberties plan lawsuits against the NSA wiretaps, a revived Al Gore calls out Dubya on Snoopgate (Transcript.) Interestingly enough, “Gore was supposed to have been introduced, using a video link, by former congressman Robert L. Barr Jr. (R-Ga.) — a bitter adversary of Gore and President Bill Clinton during the 1990s who now shares Gore’s concern over the surveillance program. That strange-bedfellows moment was thwarted by a technological breakdown.“
He has refused his assent to laws.
“It appears unlikely that a court would hold that Congress has expressly or impliedly authorized the NSA electronic surveillance operations here,’ the authors of the CRS report wrote. The administration’s legal justification ‘does not seem to be…well-grounded.'” A 44-page nonpartisan report by the Congressional Research Service finds Dubya’s dubious reliance on presidential prerogative to explain away the NSA wiretaps doesn’t hold up.
Repeated Injuries and Usurpations.
With most of their arguments already rendered false or nonsensical, “Big Time” Dick Cheney invokes an old standby to justify the illegal NSA wiretaps (which, it turns out, may have begun before White House authorization): 9/11, 9/11, 9/11. And, also in the King George department, Dubya in effect announces he’ll bypass the new torture ban whenever he feels like it. Says one legal expert: “The signing statement is saying ‘I will only comply with this law when I want to, and if something arises in the war on terrorism where I think it’s important to torture or engage in cruel, inhuman, and degrading conduct, I have the authority to do so and nothing in this law is going to stop me.’” (Media Matters link via Looka.) Update: The FISA court judges want answers, and a possible NSA whistleblower steps up.
Patriot Games.
Unable to defeat the Feingold-led filibuster, the Senate GOP instead decide to punt with a six-month extension of the Patriot Act. Dubya originally said he’d veto a three-month stopgap, and the Republicans have been fervently against previous Democratic calls for a temporary extension…but at this point it sounds like the White House and GOP will take what they can get. (Feingold’s reaction: It’s “a victory for the American people.”) Update: Make that a month.
The I-Word.
“‘The fact is, the federal law is perfectly clear,’ Turley says. ‘At the heart of this [NSA wiretap] operation was a federal crime. The president has already conceded that he personally ordered that crime and renewed that order at least 30 times. This would clearly satisfy the standard of high crimes and misdemeanors for the purpose of an impeachment.'” Salon‘s Michelle Goldberg assesses the current political temperature for Dubya’s impeachment. “‘For Republicans to suggest that this is not a legitimate question of federal crimes makes a mockery of their position during the Clinton period. For Republicans, this is the ultimate test of principle.‘” Update: Slate‘s Dahlia Lithwick also muses on Dubya’s distaste for the rule of law.
Luttig Livid.
Passed over thrice for a Dubya high court nomination, conservative appeals court judge J. Michael Luttig today got the chance to exercise his wrath upon the administration in a decision regarding Jose Padilla, and for good reason. “The appeals court opinion reflected a tone of anger that is rare for a federal court addressing the United States government…Luttig said the government’s actions created the appearance ‘that the government may be attempting to avoid’ Supreme Court review in a matter of ‘especial national importance.’ He also suggested that the government’s actions in the Padilla case may possibly have had negative consequences for ‘the public perception of the war on terror’ and ‘also for the government’s credibility before the courts in litigation ancillary to that war.‘”
Judge of Conscience.
“What I’ve heard some of the judges say is they feel they’ve participated in a Potemkin court.” Allegedly in protest over Dubya’s illegal use of wiretaps, US District Judge James Robertson resigns from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (or FISA court.) Meanwhile, the NYT reports that, despite what the administration is saying, some purely domestic calls were overheard via Dubya’s warrantless wiretaps.
Al PETA?
Is the FBI searching for Al Qaeda…or the Army of the 12 Monkeys? In yet another example of scary overreaching by intelligence organizations of late, the ACLU disclosed today that the FBI has been spying on several innocuous activist organizations since 9/11, including PETA, Greenpeace, and the Catholic Workers’ Group.