BUSH AND WIRETAPPING
George Bush states repeatedly that he has Constitutional authority to conduct wiretaps without a court order. Bush fails to specifically cite what in the Constitution provides him with dictatorial powers.
Wiretapping without a court order is illegal. Three separate laws make it a crime to engage in electronic surveillance unless specifically authorized by statute.50USC 1809, 47 USC 605, and 18 USC 2511. The U.S. constitution outlaws unlawful wiretaps: The Fourth Amendment provides that "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The Reagan Administration argued that the President had the power to authorize domestic surveillance of subversives residing in America. The case was handled by current Supreme court nominee Samuel Alito while he was working in Reagan's Justice Department. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected Reagans's contention that the courts were not adequate to deal with the sensitive classified information, could not make knowledgeable judgements about the threats to national security, and that the President had dictatorial authority to order wiretaps without the Courts. Even if the wiretaps were "reasonable" the Supreme court wrote, they violated the Fourth Amendment.
Also, a majority of Americans are against unauthorized wiretaps regardless of Bush's rhetoric in rationalizing the illegal surveillance.
George Bush has violated the law and and needs to be held accountable for assuming dictatorial powers in a democracy.
By Christian Gatsby
