Surveillance Ruling “Neither Careful Nor Scholarly”: Post


Yesterday’s ruling by a federal district court in Detroit, striking down the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance program “is neither careful nor scholarly,” the Washington Post says in an editorial concluding that U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor’s headline-grabbing opinion “will not be helpful.”

A broad congressional authorization to use force against Al Qaeda, the Bush administration argues, permits the wiretapping notwithstanding existing federal surveillance law; inherent presidential powers, it suggests, allow it to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance on its own authority. Taylor devotes a scant few pages to dismissing the arguments without even discussing key precedents, the Post says. The newspaper expresses the hope that higher-level courts will treat the complex, important issues more seriously.


Comments are closed.