Ed Huntress wrote:
G.W. wrote:
4th Amendment:
"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."

Yep, I see it. It says right there that international phone calls to
Al Qaida-connected people shall not be monitored in time of war (unless
a court has taken the time to approve it, of course).

Sorry, G.W., but "to be secure in your person" means the government can't
invade your privacy without cause -- including your phone calls.
snip

After reading:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/ht...tml#amdt4_hd37

I'm thinking that the issue isn't quite as cut and dried as some on
either side of the issue are trying to make it. I'm no lawyer and I
imagine that the comments on the web site only scratch the surface of
the issue, but I'm left with, "The question of the scope of the
President’s constitutional powers, if any, remains judicially
unsettled."


R,
Tom Q.
--
Remove bogusinfo to reply.