One thing I would really like to know

Has Senator Obama actually read the text of FISA Amendments Act of 2008? aka H.R. 6304 (new pdf link)

Not one of his staffers, he himself?

I mean all of it.
Specifically Title II Section 802?

Specifically a) 4) B) ii)?

I would like a lawyer to explain to me how "determined to be lawful" is consistent with US law and precedent?
As far as I understand it, a deputy head of an element of the intelligence community indicating that the action was "determined to be lawful" is meaningless.
Determined by who? A court? A judge? Their dog?

I understand the pragmatism, the political traps and the general sausage making, but I also understand the concept of ex post facto laws, and what happens to principles when you violate them.

The executive in the US does not determine what is lawful. Not the President, not the Attorney General and not deputy heads of elements of undefined agencies.

Although I must say it will simplify the Supreme Court schedule if the AG can just issue written directives determining what is lawful.

PS - hrmph thomas.loc.gov expires searches on congressional bills - typical.
Makes sense in a way, since bills under consideration may be amended, but the old versions are still of historical interest and ought to be static, not dynamic.

Tags

More like this

Congress is moving on 2012 appropriations, and the Science agency "minibus" bill has reported out of conference... So, fiscal 2012 started last month, and funding is currently under a short term "continuing resolution" through friday. Three of the appropriation bills the House and Senate had…
there is a revised version of House Resolution 1 on thomas.loc.gov looks like it might be the "final version" of the stimulus bill, post-conference assuming that it is, here are the relevant bits (thomas.loc.gov is dynamic, can't provide static links): UPDATE: Nope, those are too small - Pelosi…
so, this week is, yet again, decision time on the mystifying FISA Amendments Act this is an abominable piece of legislation which simultaneously manages to gut parts of the US Constitution, set historically bad precedents and violate centuries of hard fought legal principles It is not science, and…
The NY Times reports on another NSA lawsuit, this one from the Center for Constitutional Rights, that went to court in Manhattan yesterday. The judge in this case seems to be taking a more careful approach than Judge Taylor in the previous case, but a lot of what went on yesterday is fascinating.…