Team Obama Really Doesn’t Want A Judge Ruling On Constitutionality Of NSA Spying Programs

Team Obama asserts that the need for intelligence overrides that pesky Constitutional thingy

(Venture Beat) The White House filed papers late Friday to stop a federal judge from deciding whether the warrantless surveillance operations were legal or not.

The government said that, despite leaks by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden, full disclosure of the surveillance data would put government secrets at risk. Divulging these secrets in a court would cause “extremely grave damage to the national security of the United States,” wrote James Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, in the filing.

The government can use its state secrets privilege to block information from being used in a court, and the Justice Department has asked the federal judge, Jeffrey S. White of the Northern District of California, to dismiss the case without ruling on whether the programs violated the First or Fourth Amendments of the Constitution. White had earlier ordered the government to evaluate how the disclosurs by Snowden had affected its earlier assertions of state secrets.

There you go: government secrets are more important than the Rights of US citizens. Yes, there is a need for secret programs. But they should be in accordance with our Constitution, and these NSA programs are simply sweeping up information on US citizens without warrants and without knowing what is being done with the information.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “Team Obama Really Doesn’t Want A Judge Ruling On Constitutionality Of NSA Spying Programs”

  1. Jeffery says:

    It’s good to know that the far-right agrees with the ACLU, liberals and progressives on this issue. All our recent President’s have been on the wrong side of this, but it’s understandable – they don’t want to be the President when terrorists are successful with a strike.

  2. gitarcarver says:

    It is good to know that Jeffy continues the liberal tradition of being a moral relativist depending on who is in office.

    As for being in office when something goes south, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, IRS targeting of conservative groups, illegal search of reporters emails, charging reporters for doing their job, Eric Holder perjury in front of Congress, illegal appointments, ignoring Supreme Court rulings, …..

    It goes on and on and on.

    But I am sure that people like Jeffy still believe that “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” Or “if you like your coverage, you can keep your coverage.” Or “insurance costs will go down.”

    Liberals love liars.

  3. gitarcarver says:

    Teach,

    The other thing that the Obama administration is desperate to keep out of the courts – specifically the Supreme Court – is any legal challenge to the idea of “disparate impact.”

    It is a favorite charge against people, companies and organizations but each time there has been a challenge reach the SCOTUS, the administration has settled and essentially run away.

Bad Behavior has blocked 5906 access attempts in the last 7 days.