Senate Democrats, having talked themselves silly during the confirmation hearing of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito and unwittingly catapulted the fellow to rock-star status, may yet get the definitive response they sought from him on whether President Bush’s warrantless wiretap program is legal.
The problem is, Democrats probably will like what they may hear from Alito on eavesdropping even less the next time around.
And when might that be? Perhaps only a few years from now, if the eavesdropping lawsuit filed last week by the American Civil Liberties Union against the National Security Agency ends up zigzagging its way to the high court occupied by a Justice Alito. It’s possible.
Meantime, the ACLU and privacy groups have become energized like no time before over the Bush administration’s secret eavesdropping initiative. “President Bush may believe he can authorize spying on Americans without judicial or congressional approval, but this program is illegal and we intend to put a stop to it,” said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero.
The suit was filed by journalists, scholars, attorneys, and national nonprofit organizations, which often communicate by phone and e-mail with people in the Middle East. According to the ACLU, they believe their communications are being intercepted by the NSA-supposedly disrupting their ability to talk with sources, locate witnesses and engage in advocacy.
Do the plaintiffs also know their cell-phone records are for sale?
It was not the ACLU suit, though, that made the biggest political waves last week. Rather, it was pronouncements from two former Clinton-Gore administration alums in interpretative speeches on Martin Luther King Day.
Al Gore reminded the audience at Constitution Hall that Dr. King was illegally wiretapped by the FBI, which wanted the goods on the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and King’s personal life. Gore said the revelation of the secret eavesdropping campaign helped lead to congressional curbs on wiretapping-including the enactment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I’m unclear about the precise historical accuracy of all this, coming after all from one of the fathers of the Internet.
Gore said telecom carriers should not be considered innocent, idle bystanders without recourse. “Any telecommunications company that has provided the government with access to private information concerning the communications of Americans without a proper warrant should immediately cease and desist their complicity in this apparently illegal invasion in the privacy of American citizens,” barked Gore.
The day may come when legality of Bush’s eavesdropping program comes before Alito and his Supreme Court brethren. My hunch is it would be upheld. The bigger question is this: How powerful can the executive branch become in the name of homeland security in the new post-9/11 world?
