Create an Account
username: password:
 
  MemeStreams Logo

RE: USNews.com: The White House says spying on terrorism suspects without court approval is OK. What about physical searches?

search


RE: USNews.com: The White House says spying on terrorism suspects without court approval is OK. What about physical searches?
by Mike the Usurper at 2:18 pm EST, Mar 21, 2006

Decius wrote:

Mike the Usurper wrote:
There are exceptions, but those have always been ruled by the courts under the "probable cause" clause of this. A major topic twenty years ago was a "good faith" exception. That was rejected. So what might constitute a "reasonable search" without a warrant?

If you can't get a warrant, it's an unreasonable search. Period.

Not in the case of a foreign intelligence matter.

In the time immediately preceding FISA, a number of courts squarely addressed the issue of "warrantless wiretaps". In both United States v. Brown, 484 F.2d 418 (5th Cir. 1973), and United States v. Butenko, 494 F.2d 593 (3rd Cir. 1974), the courts upheld warrantless wiretaps. In Brown, a US citizen's conversation was captured by a wiretap authorized by the Attorney General for foreign intelligence purposes. In Butenko, the court held a wiretap valid if the primary purpose was for gathering foreign intelligence information.

A plurality opinion in Zweibon v. Mitchell, 516 F.2d 594 (D.C. Cir. 1975), held that a warrant was required for the domestic surveillance of a domestic organization. In this case, the court found that the domestic organization was not a "foreign power or their agent", and "absent exigent circumstances, all warrantless electronic surveillance is unreasonable and therefore unconstitutional."

Tom? That's wiretaps, not physical searches. We're talking about apples and oranges. Physical searches require a warrant, period.

RE: USNews.com: The White House says spying on terrorism suspects without court approval is OK. What about physical searches?


 
 
Powered By Industrial Memetics