PFAW Foundation calls for investigations of illegal White House wiretapping program
People for the American Way Foundation is stunned and saddened by the recent New York Times story, now verified by the Bush administration, that the president has illegally approved the wiretapping of hundreds, perhaps thousands of Americans without any judicial authorization. This revelation exposes the latest, but arguably the most egregious, undermining of our civil liberties in a generation. The Bush administration's authorization of the National Security Agency (NSA) to engage in domestic eavesdropping without warrants, in direct violation of statutes prohibiting such action, quite simply, shocks the conscience. The Bush administration's defense of this program has strained all conceivable boundaries of legal credibility and the president's steadfast refusal to curtail this program now raises the issue to the level of a legitimate constitutional crisis.
The laws on our books prohibiting domestic eavesdropping without warrants leave little room for legal ambiguity. The 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) prohibits warrantless searches and states: "A person is guilty of an offense," … "if he intentionally . . . engages in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute." 50 U.S.C. § 1809(a)(1). The FISA law also explicitly considered the use of warrants in wartime in 50 U.S.C. Section 1811 which states that "during time of war"... "the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this title to acquire foreign intelligence information for a period not to exceed fifteen days following a declaration of war by the Congress." Even with a broad, generous analysis that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) is akin to an authorization of war, the administration admittedly exceeded the statutory prohibition of fifteen days.
In addition, even in the absence of war, FISA specifically allows domestic surveillance without a warrant for a short period before going to the court, a period increased to 72 hours at the request of the Bush administration after 9/11. Yet the administration has ignored this provision and has unilaterally ordered secret wiretapping. And as former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle recently explained, Congressional leaders rejected proposed wording in the AUMF that would have given the president authority to take action within the U.S.
This strident abuse of executive powers has sounded alarm bells on Capitol Hill and has inspired a bipartisan contingent of senators to question the legality of the program. Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) has promised to hold hearings to investigate the NSA program, with Republican Senators Hagel (R-NE) and Snowe (R-ME) joining Democrats Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Carl M. Levin (D-MI), and Ron Wyden (D-OR) in supporting such oversight. In addition, Specter and Senator Leahy (D-VT) both sent letters to Judge Samuel Alito, nominee to the Supreme Court, warning him that he will encounter close questioning concerning the legality of the program during his confirmation hearings next month. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), summarized the bipartisan concerns on the Hill during an interview on CBS News' "Face the Nation": "I want to see the statute. I want to see the executive order. Whatever legal authority was used, I want someone to explain to me how it justified not going to a court that was set up for this very purpose."
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=20238