|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
National NewsConservative News
A Perverse and Dangerous Ruling
By Gary Palmer
Posted on: October 26, 2006
By striking down the Terrorists Surveillance Program (TSP) Judge Anna Diggs Taylor has hopefully opened the eyes of the American public to the Leftist political insurgency that is undermining the United States' ability to defend itself against future terrorist attacks.
In a ruling that many legal experts are broadly agreeing is poorly reasoned, Judge Taylor, a federal district judge for Eastern Michigan appointed by Jimmy Carter, has ruled that the TSP violates the First and Fourth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), Title III and the Separation of Powers Doctrine.
The lawsuit was filed by the ACLU on behalf of scholars, attorneys, journalists and non-profit groups that communicate with people in the Middle East that they fear might be targets for surveillance. Given that the TSP is only conducting surveillance on individuals and groups that have ties to Islamic terrorist groups, it raises some suspicion that the ACLU and the groups they represented in the suit might be communicating with people whose mission is to kill and maim as many American men, women, and children as they can. After all, one of the non-profit groups represented by the ACLU is the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group that has in the past had members connected with terrorist groups.
I could be wrong, but I believe most people would expect to have their phone calls monitored by the government if they were talking with extremists that have taken a vow to destroy our country. And I think the vast majority of Americans would also expect our government to constantly monitor the conversations and activities of suspected terrorists in this country and around the world.
Prior to Taylor's ruling, no American court had ever ruled that a U.S. president did not have the authority to conduct such surveillance programs. Even though not a single specific abuse of the TSP has been found, and despite the fact that it has proven successful in helping to stop terrorist attacks, Taylor took the unprecedented step to terminate the program.
Aside from the national security implications of the ruling, from a scholarly legal perspective, Taylor's ruling is an embarrassment.
Commenting on Taylor's ruling, Bobby Chesney, a national security law specialist at Wake Forest, said, "Regardless of what your position is on the merits of the issue, there's no question that it's a poorly reasoned decision." Bryan Cunningham, a former federal prosecutor in the Clinton Administration, wrote that Taylor made "breathtaking mistakes" in her application of the First and Fourth Amendments. He said that, "Regrettably, the only plausible explanation is that she wanted the result she wanted and was willing to ignore and misread vast portions of constitutional law to get there, gambling the lives and security of her fellow Americans in the bargain."
In other words, Taylor engaged in an act of reckless judicial activism.
While there is no way to hold Judge Taylor or any other liberal activist federal judge accountable to the voters, the voters can hold the politicians and parties accountable for putting them in the federal courts. It may turn out that this ruling makes millions of voters acutely aware that it matters who they elect to appoint and confirm federal judges and how vitally important the November 2006 elections will be in this regard.
Coming exactly one week to the day after British authorities busted the terrorist plot to bomb at least ten U.S.-bound airliners, it is almost incomprehensible that an American judge would order the shut down of a program that is so critical to protecting us from such plots. Moreover, the fact that Islamists involved in the London bombings last year, those arrested last week in the airliner bombing plot, and the 17 arrested this summer in Canada were all citizens of those countries should give added emphasis to the need for intensifying our surveillance and information gathering operations, both domestically and internationally.
Unfortunately, this ruling puts liberal political interests above protecting the lives of American citizens from future terrorist attacks. It is perhaps the worst example of the political wars that are being waged by radical Leftists blinded by their hatred of President Bush. Judge Taylor exposed herself to the charge that this ruling was politically motivated to undermine Bush's credibility by sarcastically writing in her opinion that "…there are no hereditary Kings in America," a clear reference to the fact that President Bush is the son of our 41st president.
But this bit of pandering to her Leftist political friends undermines her credibility rather than the President's. And the ringing praise for Taylor's decision from high-ranking Democrats magnifies how out of touch with the mainstream they are when it comes to national security.
By ordering the immediate and permanent shut down of the TSP, Judge Taylor is attempting to deprive the Bush Administration of a critical intelligence resource for preventing future terrorist attacks such as those foiled recently here in the U.S., and in Canada, and most recently in Great Britain. In effect, Taylor is attempting to take away the vital intelligence gathering capability that helped stop the planned attacks against U.S.-bound airliners and that could have helped prevent the attacks on 9/11. Hopefully, the federal appeals court will quickly strike down this perverse and dangerous ruling.
Multiculturalism: Disarming America and the West, September 21, 2006.
World War III, August 2, 2006.
Murderous Martyrs, August 2, 2006.
Another Strategy For Fighting Terrorism, April 7, 2006.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
