* Require Court Authorization Before Surveillance Begins. Except in emergency situations, surveillance should never be conducted solely on the basis of the executive branch's discretion. Courts must have a meaningful role in approving or denying wiretaps.
* Prevent Bulk Collection of U.S. Communications. No one disagrees that the government should be able to collect in bulk foreign to foreign communications, whether or not incidentally routed through the U.S. However, when one of the parties is American or located in the U.S., government should only be able listen in if the surveillance is specifically targeted at an individual.
* Protect Communications of People in the U.S. Capture of foreign communications can, and should, be conducted in a manner that protects people on U.S. soil. That includes allowing targeting of suspects abroad, but heightening restrictions on the use of information to which a U.S. person is a party. U.S. communications should be used and disseminated only when there is an emergency or a link to terrorism. The government should always be required to return to the FISA court to obtain an individualized order if listening to someone in the U.S. ever becomes a significant purpose of the lawful surveillance of a foreigner.
* Exclude Retroactive Immunity for Telecommunication Providers. Neither Congress nor the American public has yet to receive a full accounting of what telecommunication providers did with Americans' most intimate communications or the legal basis for doing so. Without this information, Congress should not even consider denying Americans their day in court to vindicate their rights.
* Provide for Robust Congressional Oversight. Any new authorities must be carefully scrutinized by Congress to ensure that American privacy is protected. Congress has the duty to ensure that the executive branch does not overreach in the name of national security.
* Minimize Sunset Provision. The recent sunset of the Protect America Act is a perfect example of how such reasonable expiration dates for laws that implicate basic constitutional principles force the administration and Congress to review whether authorities are truly needed and whether they are narrowly crafted to protect Americans' rights. Any new authority should again include a reasonably short sunset.
After reading over their list of “protections and principles” I get the feeling they want America to be the “safe zone” as if we were playing a game of chase on the schoolyard. It’s apparent the best interests of America are not first and foremost. Protecting the terrorist by extending rights afforded to American citizens is not going to win this war and keep our country safe.
4 comments:
Sounds like a Keep CAIR Out Of Jail Plan more than anything else.
Their whole purpose seems to be undercutting the Executive branch of the government. Making Congress and the Courts play an active role in wartime surveillance is counterproductive and probably unconstitutional.
And that point about minimizing sunsets is just a way of maximizing Congress's ability to hamstring the President. It's a power play, pure and simple. And the terrorists would benefit. The Left loves the terrorists.
That's exactly what cair and the others like the aclu and arab American institute want to do. By taking control from the executive branch and giving it to congress and the liberal judges furthers their anti-American agenda.
Great comment Skye.
"...as if we were playing a game of chase on the schoolyard..."
Great analogy, Janice.
How PollyAnnish and blind do you have to be to think these people are anything but a threat?
The true axis of evil: The Islamists and their lefty handmaidens.
I fear they are going to be the death of us all.
Post a Comment