If it's not abused, wiretap seems wise

Dallas Morning News | Mark Davis:

“In this war, the Bush argument is that vital information may be lost by running every surveillance request through a federal judge under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This is not a general snub of the FISA courts, just the establishment of a bar in certain limited cases where the timely need for intelligence justifies the shortcut.”

Ed Cognoski responds:

Hmmm... If it's not abused, unlimited power seems wise. Sounds so reasonable. Trouble is, if it is abused, unlimited power is, well, unlimited. Which is why our Founding Fathers so wisely created a system of checks and balances. And why Benjamin Franklin so wisely said, 'They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.'

Besides, the argument that requiring court approval before every wiretap prevents quick action in emergencies is a straw man argument. There is no such requirement today. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) already provides for such emergencies. The attorney general can unilaterally issue warrants for wiretaps and searches of suspected terrorists for 72 hours before they are subject to review and approval by federal court. What the Bush administration is claiming is sole, perpetual, unreviewable power to conduct such wiretaps and searches, completely unchecked by judicial review. That is simply unacceptable in a Constitutional democracy, no matter how much Mark Davis' trust of this particular President affords Mark Davis "the luxury of comfort and, some would say, complacency" about potential abuse of power.