FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA

[EbenezerMcIntosh]

I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul attempt . . . .

The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution by allowing the federal government to engage in the bulk collection of American citizens’ communications without a search warrant. That US citizens can have their private communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.

In addition to gutting the fourth amendment, this measure will deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by telecommunication companies involved in the Administration’s illegal wiretapping program and the right to seek redress in the courts for the wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions once the law has been changed.

Ex post facto laws have long been considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the Constitution that “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.

We should understand that decimating the protections that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats may exist. We can protect this country without violating the Constitution.

[Maat]

1. Well-put.

I've called Senator Boxer and Senator Feinstein. I also called Senator Reid. At least Boxer is in our corner.

[gateley]

6. Boxer is REALLY in the corner,.

She was on the floor arguing yesterday, and when Dodd filibustered in Feb, she was one of THE FEW who were actually there to support him.

Have you heard how Feinstein will vote? (Or would I rather not know?)

[horseshoecrab]

2. "We can protect this country without violating the Constitution"

Beautiful.

Thank you, EbenezerMcIntosh

horseshoecrab

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. They are hiding something. They are hiding something. They are hiding something.

[HamdenRice]

4. Retroactive immunity is NOT an example of an ex post facto law

Could we please drop this erroneous meme?

An ex post facto law is a law that criminalize an act that was legal at the time that the act was carried out. An example of an ex post facto law would be, for example, a law passed today that made it an offense to withdraw more than $100 from an ATM any time after September 11, 2001.

Retroactive immunity in FISA says that certain acts that may have given rise to civil liability at the time they were committed are not actionable. While not common, both state legislatures and the federal government have done this. For example, there is a campaign in New York to repeal the horrible "Rockefeller Drug laws" which impose long sentences for minor drug offenses by enacting lighter sentences, and the apply those lighter sentences retroactively so that people in prison today might be released.

Relieving civil liability retroactively is completely different from imposing criminal liability retroactively.

[TexasObserver]

5. Thanks. I've grown weary explaining this simple point.

You did so very well.