U.S. judge criticizes president on wiretaps
Headline News
[##_1L|1191100322.jpg|width="100" height="110" alt=""|_##]A federal judge who used to authorize wiretaps in terrorist and espionage cases criticized President Bush's decision to order warrantless surveillance after the Sept. 11 attacks. Royce Lamberth, a district court judge in Washington, said Saturday it was proper for executive branch agencies to conduct such surveillance. "But what we have found in the history of our country is that you can't trust the executive," he said at the American Library Association's convention.
"We have to understand you can fight the war [on terrorism] and lose everything if you have no civil liberties left when you get through fighting the war," said Lamberth, appointed by President Ronald Reagan.
The judge disagreed with letting the executive branch alone decide which people to spy on in national security cases.
"The executive has to fight and win the war at all costs. But judges understand the war has to be fought, but it can't be at all costs," Lamberth said. "We still have to preserve our civil liberties. Judges are the kinds of people you want to entrust that kind of judgment to more than the executive."
Lamberth was named chief of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in 1995 by Chief Justice William Rehnquist. He held that post until 2002.
The court meets in secret to review applications from the FBI, the National Security Agency and other agencies for warrants to tap or search the homes of people in the U.S. in terrorist or espionage cases.
Shortly after Sept. 11, Bush authorized the NSA to spy on calls between people in the U.S. and suspected terrorists abroad without court warrants. The administration said it needed to act faster than the court could and that the president had constitutional authority to order warrantless domestic spying.
Related listings
-
Ethics panel, state bar probe Delgadillo
Headline News 06/22/2007Investigators from the Los Angeles Ethics Commission and the State Bar of California have launched separate inquiries related to City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo's use of city resources for personal reasons, authorities and sources said Thursday.The inqui...
-
Suit filed to close new attorney-rating site Avvo
Headline News 06/16/2007The suit claims that Avvo, which tries to affix a score of 1 to 10 on thousands of attorneys in 10 states, violates the state's Consumer Protection Act. The suit does not ask for a specific monetary amount, though Berman is asking the court to shut d...
-
High court OKs limits on use of union dues
Headline News 06/15/2007[##_1L|1232899910.jpg|width="131" height="91" alt=""|_##]In a setback for organized labor, the Supreme Court ruled yesterday that states may bar public employee unions from using compulsory dues for political purposes unless individuals give their ex...
Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?
IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child.
Forte Law Group is one of only a very few law firms within the state of Connecticut that is dedicated to exclusively representing families and children with special needs.
Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer?” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.