Exception for War (Bush Spying)

[Hosnon]

§ 1811. Authorization during time of war

Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for a period not to exceed fifteen calendar days following a declaration of war by the Congress.

Exerpt from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Does the language of this statute mean that the authorization for a particular instance is not valid longer than fifteen days after the authorization during a time which Congress has declared war or that there is an absolute fifteen days after the resolution for war is passed by Congress within which the President can authorize without a court order?

Thoughts?

[newscott]

1. I still think it's illegal to spy on Americans.

Read that chapter carefully. It says foreign intelligence information. I don't think this gives Bush any wiggle room.

[Hosnon]

5. I hope it isn't illegal to spy on Americans...it is necessary many times.

But we have to have judicial oversight and a warrant (I'm even OK with retroactive warrants such as those under FISA).

[newscott]

11. That was implied by the discussion that's been going on for a couple days.

[Hosnon]

9. According to § 1802, "foreign intelligence information" specifically

excludes instances where there is a likelihood the surveillance will acquire any communication to which a United States person is a party.

So yes, you are correct that it explicitly applies only to "foreign"ers.

[PRETZEL]

2. my initial thought,

only Congress can declare war. I don't recall where Congress did that.

[Hosnon]

3. Well that's another question I have. I'm not sure whether Congress

actually declared war on terror and whether that counts as a valid war under these type of statutes.

[PRETZEL]

8. my guess is that the Founding Fathers in their definition

of war would be a declaration of war against another country. The concept of whether or not it's a war on terror or war on poverty or war on drugs, etc. doesn't constitute a declaration of war as was meant in the Constitution.

[C_U_L8R]

4. i was thinking the same thing...

what war ????

can any experts elaborate on this?
Is Bush within his rights or has he run amok??

[librechik]

6. yeah, let's have a showdown over undeclared war powers

and see if the congress stands up this time and defends itself from a presidential power grab. then we'd have a real democracy instead of what we have had for the last 60 years or so.

[Hosnon]

10. I agree. Time for Congress to man up...nt

[ddeclue]

7. "For a period not to exceed fifteen days" pretty much says it all -it's an

"For a period not to exceed fifteen days" pretty much says it all -it's an absolute 15 days.

[Doctor_J]

12. Where does it say anti-war protestors are fair targets?

did you leave something out?

[Jackpine Radical]

13. There was no declaration of war.

Also it specifies FOREIGN intelligence information.

Not that it matters to this crew. Anyway, we're in the Forever War because there's no end to the waron terror.

(BTW, terror is a tactic. It's kinda interesting to declare war on tactics. Maybe after this we can have a war on ambush, and then a war on defilading fire.)