Freedom Wins a Round

flag_constitutionU.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor shocked the world today by displaying her ability the read and decipher a 215 year-old document. Something of a legal anomaly, Taylor issued a decision based on the law, rather than on what the White House wishes the law to be.

The AP reports that the Carter appointee sided with the Constitution in the suit brought against FedGov by the American Civil Liberties Union, et al, in the process illustrating the arrogant despotism of the Bush Administration.

At question was the legality of the Administration blatantly violating the Constitution with the infamous NSA wiretapping program, even when they deny doing so. As compelling an argument as “it’s legal” is, the crafty judge somehow saw past it.

“Plaintiffs have prevailed, and the public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution,” Taylor wrote in her 43-page opinion.

The Administration, as expected, was very upset by the judiciary daring to question its actions and taking the part of legality and freedom. It wasted no time voicing disagreement and threatening appeal.

Said Ashcroft’s Orwellian replacement:

“We’re going to do everything we can do in the courts to allow this program to continue,”

News parrot-cum-podium parrot Tony Snow, relishing his new role as Nazi Propaganda Minister White House Press Secretary said the Führer

“couldn’t disagree more with this ruling.” He said the program carefully targets communications of suspected terrorists and “has helped stop terrorist attacks and saved American lives.”

Unfortunately, proving the effectiveness or the legality of the government’s carte blanche authority, the White House explained with yet another regurgitation of the bezoar of an excuse, would jeopardize national security. Translation from Swastikese to English: Trust us and stop asking questions. This closed and circular system is a textbook case of tyranny under “freedom.”

According to the ACLU this hollow, circular tripe was irrelevant:

Because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule. The administration has decried leaks that led to a New York Times report about the existence of the program last year.

The courts, like the Democrats in Congress, have, until now, humbly whimpered a frightened “yes, sir” to the Administration, gleefully agreeing to its every demand. Constitutional violations that a child could plainly understand are dismissed as the attempted trappings of anti-American radicals or crazed idealists. Perhaps legality is assumed by the masses due to the MSM’s frequent insistence that Bush is “a strict constructionist.”

Those parroting such nonsense must now be certain that Judge Taylor suffers from some deficiency of instinct that prohibits her from inherently understanding that the US Constitution includes a myriad of allowances it does not list.

Stopping just short of declaring the President a self-appointed emperor above reproach (probably because she doesn’t want to visit Cuba on the government’s terms), Taylor’s opinion contained some righteous verbal lashing.

Taylor, a Carter appointee, said the government appeared to argue that the program is beyond judicial scrutiny.
“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,” she wrote. “The three separate branches of government were developed as a check and balance for one another.”

And despite the fact that in reality such an arrangement leaves the hen house in the charge of the fox, once in a while, it works.

The entirety of Taylor’s 43 page opinion can be found here.

posted by artusregister
  • Pingback: “President Bush Is Breaking The Law” at connecting*the*dots

  • disinter
  • Checks and Balances

    A good illustration though it is more appropriately viewed from the side… as each branch is supposed to be equally able to balance the power of another…
    Checks and Balances

    At least as far as I remember… Let us hope that the judicial system continues to stand fast and curb the assault on our personal freedoms which have grown like wildfire for the last few decades… this latest administration just throws liquid oxygen on the flames…

    U.S. secrecy policy questioned

  • Checks and Balances
  • wb

    This lady needes to removed from office. What does she desire, to see more dead americans. There is no law backing this decision, she just made an opion and she will be overturned. This was an insane decision. To not wire tape these people should be against the law.

    Its all about hate bush, isnt it ya numb skull.

    crafty judge.. witch craft

    Nazi bla bla bla.. ur the nazi.. do ur history

    ur quoting the ACLU…. well that speaks for it self

    what a mistake ur making

  • HippyChimp
  • Artus Register

    WB,

    Perhaps you could point out for the rest of us what law there is backing the Administration’s decision to conduct surveillance on US citizens without a warrant.

    What does she desire, to see more dead americans.

    That must be it. The only thing standing in the way of our utter destruction is the Department of Justice and a roving, warrantless wiretap. Such surveillance to terrorists is like Superman’s Kryptonite.

    Its all about hate bush, isnt it ya numb skull.

    If that were a question, I’d answer “no.”

    If you’d read a bit more of the articles here you might realize that the Republican portion of our one-party system is the target of our ire more than the Democratic side by simple virtue of the R’s enjoying more control at the moment.

    crafty judge.. witch craft

    What does that mean?

    Nazi bla bla bla.. ur the nazi.. do ur history

    “Doing history” will illustrate to me that I am a Nazi? What have you seen on this site that is remotely Nazi-like?