The President Broke the Law

Plain and simple. At least according to a Federal judge who this week ruled on the matter, the first step in a case that will undoubtedly reach the US Supreme Court in the near future:

[T]he Bush administration's effort to monitor communications without court oversight runs afoul of the Bill of Rights and federal law.

Ruling in a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and other advocacy groups in the Eastern District of Michigan, Taylor said that the NSA wiretapping program, aimed at communications by potential terrorists, violates privacy and free speech rights and the constitutional separation of powers among the three branches of government. She also found that the wiretaps violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the 1978 law instituted to provide judicial oversight of clandestine surveillance within the United States.

"It was never the intent of the framers to give the president such unfettered control, particularly where his actions blatantly disregard the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights," Taylor wrote in her 43-page opinion. ". . . There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution. So all 'inherent powers' must derive from that Constitution."

That's a pretty scathing condemnation of Bush's efforts to impose his will on all people, not only in this country, but around the world (like in Iraq). He just does whatever he wants, whether it's legal or not, justified or unreasonable, WRONGLY assuming he's the King of the US and not its President.

I'm actually pretty curious to see how Scalia and Thomas will rule on the issue, since they are strict constitutionalists, that is they base their rulings on a strict reading of the Constitution, regardless of the fact that it was written 200 years ago and things have slightly changed ever since.

Ah, and this tidbit gets the cake:

The decision yesterday could complicate efforts by the White House and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) to win approval for a bill that would allow, but not require, Bush to submit the NSA program to a secret court for legal review.

What?! So what exactly would the purpose of such a bill be, since we already have a law that allows the President to submit his program to a secret court for legal review, the FISA Act, which Bush blatantly disregarded, disregards, and will (by his own admission) disregard in the future?

He's already allowed to ask for permission. He just doesn't do it. So if the new law won't require him to actually do it, why waste Congress' time and taxpayers' money discussing it?

I hope a lot of people ask that question to Mr. Specter as he runs for re-election in the next few months. Does he know he got elected by the people of Pennsylvania to represent them and not Bush in Congress? Does he know he occupies a particularly important position in which he should exercise some oversight on the Administration, and not just try to cover up its wrongdoings?

The hubris of that man!