Bill Would Speed Challenge to Surveillance

[Rose Siding]

WASHINGTON, March 29 — Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, introduced a bill Wednesday that would put lawsuits challenging the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance program on a fast track to the Supreme Court.

With Congress and the Bush administration at odds over the legality of eavesdropping on Americans without court warrants, the legislation could produce a timely ruling by the court on the program's constitutionality, Mr. Schumer said.

"We have a system of checks and balances," he said, "and, in this case, when the stakes are so high, the Supreme Court should be the ultimate check."

The bill would permit lawsuits by scholars, journalists and others who assert that they have refrained from calls or e-mail messages to Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries because of "a reasonable fear" of N.S.A. eavesdropping.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/30/politics/30nsa.html

[Kagemusha]

1. This is his bold strategy?

Introduce a bill that'll never pass that would direct the issue of Congress' abdicating its oversight responsibilities to the Supreme Court?

And why would Bush listen to the court any more than to Congress, anyway?

[Rose Siding]

2. Part of the job is writing laws and this looks like a good one

Dem Senators can't stop writing law just because they're a minority.

[rodeodance]

3. Ask cspan to cover here:

Suggest Events: Submit a public event that you think C-SPAN should cover
- [e-mail]


Friday, Mar. 31, 2006
9:30 a.m. Judiciary
To hold hearings to examine the call to censure
the President.
SD-226

[MissMillie]

4. Enumerated rights

Is it just me, or does anyone else see this SCOTUS actually upholding the program? They're a scary enough bunch to do it.

I mean, I see the right to unreasonable search as an enumerated right. Nowhere does it actually say that the President have the power to violate that, even in times of war.

But I can't expect that the 9 on the court will think that logically.