Wiretaps Ruled Illegal, But Fight Is Not Over

Bush's use of warrantless wiretaps have been ruled as unconstitutional on two different grounds. First, the warrantless wiretaps themselves were ruled illegal. Second, Bush's claiming of the authority to order the wiretaps was declared unconstitutional. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, of Detroit, White House ordered to halt wire-taps without warrants issued the ruling. However; the administration has promised to file an appeal. There is still pressure on Congress to change the law so that the president could authorize surveillance without warrants or oversight, and that U.S. persons who are constitutionally protected from such over-reaching infringements of privacy, would no longer be protected. Telecommunication companies who participated in the wiretaps may also be impacted by the ruling.

I find it a betrayal that the administration will appeal until they exhaust all legal options for the right to engage in unconstitutional behavior. In other words, they will fight to the Supreme Court where they have tried to stack the deck in their favor. Likewise, they will push Congress to change our Constitution to remove protections and expand the reach of the Executive Office. Some of course would argue the reverse - that Taylor betrayed the United States in the double negative ruling against the administration and its actions. They apparently feel that a dictatorship is appropriate, and that "if you don't have anything to hide ..." America is "too free" according to some - including those currently in power. The "patriots" ardently argue against "activist judges" who "legislate from the bench." However, Judge Taylor ruled for the status quo - the Constitution as it stands. If she had ruled otherwise, then she would have been legislating from the bench. What the Bush administration hopes for in appealing the case is to find an "activist judge" who favors their legislating from the White House.

Much of Congress, on the other hand, seems less upset about the over-reaching of the Administration, and the violation of Constitutional protections, than it does about being "left out of the loop." They seem more than willing to write legislation that would address both violations, and thereby place even more power in the Executive Branch and erode Constitutional safeguards.

Who stands for us and the nation? Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in my opinion.