Click Here

Visit Bloomberg.com to get all the news, commentary and context you need. Content,video, alerts and podcasts. Online exclusives now available.

CATEGORIES
ARCHIVES
Look Who's Linking to PoliBlog:
3cx.org
Absinthe and Cookies
Accidental Verbosity
Admiral Quixote's Roundtable
All Day Permanent Red
All Things Jennifer
Ann Althouse
The American Mind
Arguing with signposts
Arms and influence
The Astute Blogger
Asymmeterical Information
Attaboy
augustus
B-Town Blog Boys
BabyTrollBlog
Backcountry Conservative
Balloon Juice
Bananas and Such Begging to Differ
The Bemusement Park
Benedict
Bewtween the Coasts
Betsy's Page
The Big Picture
BipolarBBSBlog
BIZBLOGGER
bLogicus
Blogs for Bush
The Blog of Daniel Sale
BoiFromTroy
Boots and Sabers
brykMantra
BushBlog
The Bully Pulpit
Cadillac Tight
Caffeinated Musing
California Yankee
Captain's Quarters
Chicago Report
Chicagoland of Confusion
Citizen Smash
Coldheartedtruth
Collected Thoughts
The Command Post
Common Sense and Wonder
Confessions Of A Political Junkie
The Conservative Philosopher
Conservative Revolution
Conservative and Right
Cranial Cavity
The Daily Lemon
Daly Thoughts
DANEgerus Weblog
Dart Frog on a Cactus
Dean's World Dear Free World
Brad DeLong
Democracy Project
DiVERSiONZ
The Disagreeable Conservative Curmudgeon
Down to the Piraeus
Drink this...
Earl's log
Earthly Passions
The Education Wonks
the evangelical outpost
exvigilare
Eye of the Storm
Feste
Filtrat
Firepower Forward
The Flying Space Monkey Chronicles
The Friendly Ghost
FringeBlog
Fruits and Votes
Functional, if not decorative
G-Blog.net
The Galvin Opinion
The Glittering Eye
Haight Speech
Half-Bakered
The Hedgehog Report
Heh. Indeed.
Hellblazer
Hennessy's View
High Desert Skeptic
The Hillary Project
History and Perceptions
Robert Holcomb
I love Jet Noise
Idlewild South
Incommunicado
Independent Thinker
Insults Unpunished
Interested-Participant
Internet Ronin
Ipse Dixit
It Can't Rain All The Time...
The Jay Blog
Jen Speaks
Joefish's Freshwater Blog
John Lemon
johnrpierce.info blog
Judicious Asininity
Jump In, The Water's Fine!
Just On The Other Side
KeepinItReal
A Knight's Blog
The Kudzu Files
LeatherPenguin
Let's Try Freedom
LibertarianJackass.com
Liberty Father
Life and Law
David Limbaugh
LittleBugler
Locke, or Demosthenes?
LostINto
Mad Minerva
Gary Manca
Mark the Pundit
Mediocre but Unexciting
memeorandum
Mental Hiccups
Miller's Time
Mind of Mog
Minorities For Bush
Mr. Hawaii
The Moderate Voice
The Modulator
Much Ado
Mungowitz End
My opinion counts
my thoughts, without the penny charge
My Word
mypetjawa
Naw
Neophyte Pundit
Neutiquam erro
New England Republican
NewsHawk Daily
neWs Round-Up
NixGuy.com
No Pundit Intended
Nobody asked me, but...
Obsidian Wings
Occam's Toothbrush
On the Fritz
On the Third Hand
One Fine Jay
Out of Context
Outside the Beltway
Suman Palit
Parablemania
Passionate America
Brian Patton
Peaktalk
Pelicanpost
Peppermint Patty
Phlegma
John Pierce
PiratesCove
Politicalman
The Politicker
The Politburo Diktat
Political Annotation
Political Blog For The Politically Incorrect
Possumblog
Power Politics
Powerpundit.com
Practical Penumbra
Priorities & Frivolities ProfessorBainbridge.com
Prof. Blogger's Pontifications
Pros and Cons
protein wisdom
PunditFilter
Pundit Heads
QandO
The Queen of All Evil
Quotes, Thoughts, and other Ramblings
Ramblings' Journal
Random Acts of Kindness
Random Nuclear Strikes
Ranting Rationalist
Read My Lips
Reagan Country
Red State Diaries
Jay Reding.com
A Republican's Blog
Resource.full
The Review
Rhett Write
Right Side of the Rainbow
Right Wingin-It
Right Wing News
Right Voices
Rightward Reasonings
riting on the wall
robwestcott
Rooftop Report
RoguePundit
The Sake of Argument
Sailor in the Desert
Scrappleface
Secular Sermons
Sha Ka Ree
Shaking Spears
She Who Will Be Obeyed!
The Skeptician
The Skewed
Slant/Point.
Slobokan's Site O' Schtuff
small dead animals
Sneakeasy's Joint
SoCal Law Blog
A Solo Dialogue
Solomonia
Some Great Reward
Southern Musings
Speed of Thought...
Spin Killer
Matthew J. Stinson
A Stitch in Haste
Stop the ACLU
The Strange Political Road Trip of Jane Q. Public
The Strata-Sphere
Stuff about
Suman Palit
SwimFinsSF
Target Centermass
Templar Pundit
The Temporal Globe
Tex the Pontificator
Texas Native
think about it...
Tiger
Tobacco Road Fogey
Toner Mishap
Tony Talks Tech
The Trimblog
Truth. Quante-fied.
Twenty First Century Republican
Unlocked Wordhoard
Use The Forks!!
Ut Humiliter Opinor
Varifrank
VietPundit
Vista On Current Events
VodkaPundit
Vox Baby
Jeff Vreeland's Blog
Wall of Sleep
Weapons of Mass Discussion
Who Knew?
The Window Manager
Winning Again!
WizBang!
WizBang Tech
The World Around You
The Yin Blog
You Big Mouth, You!
Zygote-Design
al.com - Alabama Weblogs

AJC's 2004 Election Politics Sites and Blogs
Campaign Finance
Welcome to newcounterculture.com World O' Blogs
WRKO-AM's "Political Junkies" list
Yahoo! Directory Political Weblogs
Young Elephant

Who Links Here

Thursday, February 9, 2006
Legal Justifications III: The Constitution
By Dr. Steven Taylor @ 1:53 pm

(Another post in an ongoing series of thoughts on the wiretap controversy and the legal and constitutional argument that surround it. Previously: Part I and Part II).

There are many things in the political realm that I find puzzling. These days one of them is the notion that seems to be floating out there in regards to the role of Congress in national security affairs by conservatives who also frequently argue for either originalism or strict construction vis-a-vis the US Constitution.

In that arena, I would note that it is awfully hard to argue that the Founding Fathers did not envision a significant role for the Congress in the overall area of national security policy.

In the list of powers expressly granted to Congress in Article I, Section 8 we have the following:

Clause 10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

Clause 11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

Clause 12: To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

Clause 13: To provide and maintain a Navy;

Clause 14: To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

Clause 15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Clause 11 is interesting. The most I think about it, for example, the more I think that those who believe in a strict interpretation of the Constitution should insist on the resuscitation of this power-the US ought not be getting involved in actions like Korea, Viet Nam, Gulf Wars I & II, etc. without declarations of war from Congress.

However, the later portion of the clause is of interest in the current debate: “make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water” might be construed as being applicable to the actions in the war on terror abroad, amongst other clauses listed above.

At a minimum, those (like some of my commenters) who seem to think that Congress has no role to play here are simply wrong.

As a side note, Clause 12 and 14 clearly allow the Congress to regulate the behavior of US troops (as in the McCain amendment on torture).

And, of course, there’s that whole Fourth Amendment thing:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

To be clear: I have never been concerned with the idea that we are listening in on foreign communications-the problem is that under the program as I understand it, US citizens on US soil are subject to wiretap without a warrant. Surely that violates the strict letter of the Fourth Amendment.

Hence: the solution is to find a legal way to acquire a warrant that allows for the surveillance in question.

Bottom line of all of this: there are serious constitutional issues at play here, and to deny that fact is to ignore the constitution and to focus on only what one wants the outcome to be (in this case, people want al Qaeda monitored, and seem willing to ignore other issues if those ends are achieved).

7 Comments »

  1. “Surely that violates the strict letter of the Fourth Amendment.”

    The latest gobbledygook from the apologists of the warrantless wiretap program is that it’s simply “not unreasonable,” hence the Fourth Amendment does not even apply. You don’t want another 9/11, do you?

    Heaven help us…

    Comment by KipEsquire — Thursday, February 9, 2006 @ 4:16 pm

  2. A strict reading of the Fourth Amendment would suggest that it does not pertain to wiretaps.

    Comment by ATM — Thursday, February 9, 2006 @ 5:25 pm

  3. That would strike me as rather substantially strict interpretation. By that logic freedom of the press does not apply to broadast media nor to the internet, but only to, well, the press.

    Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Thursday, February 9, 2006 @ 6:18 pm

  4. But, if evidence it obtained through this process that persons in the US are involved, on what basis would arrest them if the evidence against them wouldn’t be admissible?

    Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Thursday, February 9, 2006 @ 6:19 pm

  5. There are two items of saliance in your post. One concerning Clause 11 “…Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water”. This could be construde that congress is responsible for the rules concerning the prisoners at Guantanamo and if Congress doesn’t like the milatary tribunals they must step up to theit responsiblities and make the rules.

    The other is about the gramatical construction of the forth amendment with the use of “…and…” as the conjuctive. Does and in this case mean “Together with or along with” or does it mean “in addition to; as well as; also.” The interpritation of this conjunctive can completly change the meaning and relationship of the two clauses that it connects.

    Comment by piscivorous — Thursday, February 9, 2006 @ 9:53 pm

  6. […] Taylor @ 7:12 pm

    (Part of a series of sorts: Previously: Part I, Part II, and Part III). This afternoon I was suffering surfing (although I think that was a Freudian typo) the radio and c […]

    Pingback by PoliBlog: A Rough Draft of my Thoughts » Legal Justification IV: FISA — Friday, February 10, 2006 @ 7:18 pm

  7. […] ed the Congress to be involved in foreign affairs, I would also point anyone interested to a list I made last week. A plain reading of the Constitution of the United States reveals the fact the Founde […]

    Pingback by PoliBlog: A Rough Draft of my Thoughts » Will is Right — Thursday, February 16, 2006 @ 9:17 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

The trackback url for this post is: http://www.poliblogger.com/wp-trackback.php?p=9330

NOTE: I will delete any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post.

Leave a comment



Take a Look At This!
Inquiries
Blogroll


Visitors Since 2/15/03
---

PoliBlog is the Host site for:

A TTLB Community


Advertisement

Marketing cars
Office Linebacker
Baseball Shopping
Business Phones
Online Banking
Advertisement


Powered by WordPress