Post by ShivaTD on Aug 10, 2013 13:27:42 GMT
In yesterday's press conference President Obama made the following statement about the NSA domestic spying on the American People where it is tracking our phone calls, emails, and other internet activities.
news.yahoo.com/obama-to-hold-white-house-news-conference-164610288.html
It doesn't take a "task force" to read and understand the 4th Amendment.
We want a search warrant issued by the court, whether it's the FISA court or any other court, where based upon "Oath or affirmation" that there is evidence of criminal activity, that names the "person" who's records are to be searched and the specific records that law enforcement, including the NSA, is looking for. That is specifically required by the Fourth Amendment and it doesn't take a task force to read the Fourth Amendment.
Supposedly President Obama is a Constitutional scholar so he should be aware of the necessity for a neutral magistrate as well as probably cause related to the issuance of any search warrant.
"Mr. President,
I don't need reassurances but instead I demand compliance with the US Constitution and clearly the NSA with it's tracking of the internet activities and phone records of the American People violates the US Constitution."
“It’s not enough for me as president to have confidence in these programs,” Obama declared at a White House news conference. “The American people have to have confidence as well.”
Among other things, Obama called for the creation of an outside task force to advise his administration on how to balance civil liberties and security issues. He also said he had directed the intelligence community to make public as much information about the spying programs as possible and directed the NSA to create a website that would be a “hub” for that information.
“These steps are designed to make sure the American people can trust that our interests are aligned with our values,” Obama said.
Among other things, Obama called for the creation of an outside task force to advise his administration on how to balance civil liberties and security issues. He also said he had directed the intelligence community to make public as much information about the spying programs as possible and directed the NSA to create a website that would be a “hub” for that information.
“These steps are designed to make sure the American people can trust that our interests are aligned with our values,” Obama said.
It doesn't take a "task force" to read and understand the 4th Amendment.
Fourth Amendment - Search and Seizure
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.
- See more at: constitution.findlaw.com/amendment4/amendment.html#sthash.D7o57uK9.dpuf
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.
- See more at: constitution.findlaw.com/amendment4/amendment.html#sthash.D7o57uK9.dpuf
We want a search warrant issued by the court, whether it's the FISA court or any other court, where based upon "Oath or affirmation" that there is evidence of criminal activity, that names the "person" who's records are to be searched and the specific records that law enforcement, including the NSA, is looking for. That is specifically required by the Fourth Amendment and it doesn't take a task force to read the Fourth Amendment.
Supposedly President Obama is a Constitutional scholar so he should be aware of the necessity for a neutral magistrate as well as probably cause related to the issuance of any search warrant.
Issuance by Neutral Magistrate .--In numerous cases, the Court has referred to the necessity that warrants be issued by a ''judicial officer'' or a ''magistrate.'' 89 ''The point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime. Any assumption that evidence sufficient to support a magistrate's disinterested determination to issue a search warrant will justify the officers in making a search without a warrant would reduce the Amendment to a nullity and leave the people's homes secure only in the discretion of police officers.'' 90 These cases do not mean that only a judge or an official who is a lawyer may issue warrants, but they do stand for two tests of the validity of the power of the issuing party to so act. ''He must be neutral and detached, and he must be capable of determining whether probable cause exists for the requested arrest or search.'' 91 The first test cannot be met when the issuing party is himself engaged in law enforcement activities, 92 but the Court has not required that an issuing party have that independence of tenure and guarantee of salary which characterizes federal judges. 93 And in passing on the second test, the Court has been essentially pragmatic in assessing whether the issuing party possesses the capacity to determine probable cause. 94
Probable Cause .--The concept of ''probable cause'' is central to the meaning of the warrant clause. Neither the Fourth Amendment nor the federal statutory provisions relevant to the area define ''probable cause;'' the definition is entirely a judicial construct. An applicant for a warrant must present to the magistrate facts sufficient to enable the officer himself to make a determination of probable cause. ''In determining what is probable cause . . . [w]e are concerned only with the question whether the affiant had reasonable grounds at the time of his affidavit . . . for the belief that the law was being violated on the premises to be searched; and if the apparent facts set out in the affidavit are such that a reasonably discreet and prudent man would be led to believe that there was a commission of the offense charged, there is probable cause justifying the issuance of a warrant.'' 95 Probable cause is to be determined according to ''the factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men, not legal technicians, act.'' 96 Warrants are favored in the law and utilization of them will not be thwarted by a hypertechnical reading of the sup porting affidavit and supporting testimony. 97 For the same reason, reviewing courts will accept evidence of a less ''judicially competent or persuasive character than would have justified an officer in acting on his own without a warrant.'' 98 Courts will sustain the determination of probable cause so long as ''there was substantial basis for [the magistrate] to conclude that'' there was probable cause. 99
- See more at: constitution.findlaw.com/amendment4/annotation02.html#2
Probable Cause .--The concept of ''probable cause'' is central to the meaning of the warrant clause. Neither the Fourth Amendment nor the federal statutory provisions relevant to the area define ''probable cause;'' the definition is entirely a judicial construct. An applicant for a warrant must present to the magistrate facts sufficient to enable the officer himself to make a determination of probable cause. ''In determining what is probable cause . . . [w]e are concerned only with the question whether the affiant had reasonable grounds at the time of his affidavit . . . for the belief that the law was being violated on the premises to be searched; and if the apparent facts set out in the affidavit are such that a reasonably discreet and prudent man would be led to believe that there was a commission of the offense charged, there is probable cause justifying the issuance of a warrant.'' 95 Probable cause is to be determined according to ''the factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men, not legal technicians, act.'' 96 Warrants are favored in the law and utilization of them will not be thwarted by a hypertechnical reading of the sup porting affidavit and supporting testimony. 97 For the same reason, reviewing courts will accept evidence of a less ''judicially competent or persuasive character than would have justified an officer in acting on his own without a warrant.'' 98 Courts will sustain the determination of probable cause so long as ''there was substantial basis for [the magistrate] to conclude that'' there was probable cause. 99
- See more at: constitution.findlaw.com/amendment4/annotation02.html#2
"Mr. President,
I don't need reassurances but instead I demand compliance with the US Constitution and clearly the NSA with it's tracking of the internet activities and phone records of the American People violates the US Constitution."
