Yesterday's ruling on NSA warrantless eavesdropping

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday, by a 2-1 decision, vacated last August's Order of the Order from District Court Judge Anna Diggs Taylor which enjoined the Bush administration from eavesdropping without warrants. Judge Taylor had found that the President's NSA warrantless eavesdropping program violates both the Constitution as well as federal law (FISA). Full Story »

Posted by Kaizar Campwala

To:


Separate email addresses with commas.
25 recipients max.

Note:

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Silhouette_sml
5.0
by Mary Reilly - Jul. 7, 2007

Extremely fair. A good demonstration of how the courts must rule in ways that force legislative clarity or change. He urges that change by demonstrating the absurdity--a catch 22--for calling into account illegal wiretapping by the president. If you can't hold him accountable because the evidence is done in secret then something needs to be changed. Great journalism.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Silhouette_sml
1.0
by Benjamin Buttons - Jul. 10, 2007

As a non-lawyer, I can't really argue about the law with a lawyer, so instead here's a pure hominem attack. It's important to remember, whenever reading anything by Glenn Greenwald, that Glenn Greenwald is a highly problematic figure to be lauded on a site like NewsTrust. He misrepresents the opposing viewpoint rather than confront it head-on, in fact that seems to be his main argument method. He used to go around making up fake identities and posting laudatory comments about himself ... More »

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Jack_dinkmeyer_thumb
4.6
by Jack Dinkmeyer - Jul. 8, 2007

An excellent article which clarifies the vacating of the government’s warrantless eavesdropping program. Although the mainstream media seem to imply the court ruled on the legality of the administration's eavesdropping, turns out the ruling concerned only the plaintiffs’ legal right to sue. So even though the administration continues its extraordinary efforts to obstruct judicial review, the legality of its eavesdropping program is still in question.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Mmonday_thumb
4.3
by Mark Monday - Jul. 7, 2007
See Full Review » (12 answers)
Member_photo_thumb
3.5
by Kaizar Campwala - Jul. 7, 2007
See Full Review » (1 answer)
Silhouette_sml
4.4
by Arden Currie - Jul. 9, 2007
See Full Review » (6 answers)
Biopic-portrait-sm_thumb
4.2
by Kelly Garrett - Jul. 9, 2007
See Full Review » (10 answers)
N1126433387_2982_thumb
4.2
by Dale Penn - Jul. 7, 2007
See Full Review » (11 answers)
Silhouette_sml
4.3
by Kenneth Hittel - Jul. 8, 2007
See Full Review » (6 answers)
Silhouette_sml
5.0
by Wayland T Washington - Jul. 8, 2007
See Full Review » (1 answer)
Silhouette_sml
2.1
by Robert Wallis - Jul. 7, 2007
See Full Review » (12 answers)
Silhouette_sml
4.9
by Art McBride - Jul. 7, 2007

Good article which both informs and gives insight into the workings of the court and the administration which is not found in the mainstream media.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Silhouette_sml
1.0
by Kevin Donovan - Jul. 7, 2007

A partisan hatchet job - particularly unfair to John Yoo.

See Full Review » (7 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.6

Good
from 13 reviews (50% confidence)
Quality
3.7
Facts
3.2
Fairness
3.5
Information
3.8
Sourcing
3.5
Style
3.2
Accuracy
3.0
Balance
2.0
Context
3.8
Popularity
3.3
Recommendation
3.5
Credibility
3.5
# Reviews
5.0
# Views
1.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!