I'm an originalist too Here is how Alexander Hamilton argued this issue in Federalist 23.

Quote:

---

"Whether there ought to be a federal government intrusted with the care of the common defense, is a question in the first instance, open for discussion; but the moment it is decided in the affirmative, it will follow, that that government ought to be clothed with all the powers requisite to complete execution of its trust. And unless it can be shown that the circumstances which may affect the public safety are reducible within certain determinate limits; unless the contrary of this position can be fairly and rationally disputed, it must be admitted, as a necessary consequence, that there can be no limitation of that authority which is to provide for the defense and protection of the community, in any matter essential to its efficacy that is, in any matter essential to the formation, direction, or support of the national forces ."

---

Hamilton and the Founders foresaw a time when the executive would have to exercise broad "inherent powers" in defense of the nation .

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review(FISCR) Jan 2009 ruled the provisions of the 'Protect America act ';passed by Congress in 2007 , dealing with the legality of warrentless wiretapping of terrorists was legal and Constitutional .Further the same court, in a 2002 sealed case upheld the constitutionality of the Patriot Act provisions that "the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." The court said it took the president's power "for granted," . "FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."[In re Sealed Case, 310 F.3d 717, 742 (Foreign Intel. Surv. Ct. of Rev. 2002)]

Hello again, tom:

When you're scared, you pass bad laws. You pretend they meet Constitutional muster, and if they don't, you wink. I know what the Fourth Amendment says, and I know what it means.

Any law that abridges my rights under that Amendment is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. That's why we shouldn't make law based on fear.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review(FISCR) Jan 2009 ruled the provisions of the 'Protect America act ';passed by Congress in 2007 , dealing with the legality of warrentless wiretapping of terrorists was legal and Constitutional .Further the same court, in a 2002 sealed case upheld the constitutionality of the Patriot Act

---

See, Judges can be overturned. Ex, how positive are you that

Quote:

---

Jihadistan AIN'T happening ON MY PHONE

---

? Who checked it for you? When? YOU ain't doing jihad, but You aren't the only one with access.

We have here 3 branches of government agreeing on the decision ;including the judiciary ;the one that some people claim is the final arbiter (But, in fact, it's for a JUDGE to decide).

The Congress passed it ;the President signed it into law ,and the court created to arbitrate FISA affirmed it . Excon is the final arbiter .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Excon is the final arbiter .

---

Hello again, tom:

Somebody has to do it. Saving the world is a lonely pursuit.

excon