Via
Think Progress, US News & World Report reveals how the government has conducted
warrantless searches of Muslim sites:
In search of a terrorist nuclear bomb, the federal government since 9/11 has run a far-reaching, top secret program to monitor radiation levels at over a hundred Muslim sites in the Washington, D.C., area, including mosques, homes, businesses, and warehouses, plus similar sites in at least five other cities, U.S. News has learned. In numerous cases, the monitoring required investigators to go on to the property under surveillance, although no search warrants or court orders were ever obtained, according to those with knowledge of the program. Some participants were threatened with loss of their jobs when they questioned the legality of the operation, according to these accounts.
More disturbing is this revelation:
"The targets were almost all U.S. citizens," says the source. "A lot of us thought it was questionable, but people who complained nearly lost their jobs. We were told it was perfectly legal."
Is a warrant needed to conduct surveillance on public property? No, not really. But these searches were conducted on the private residences of Muslims throughout the nation. Does monitoring radiation levels constitute a "search"? In 2001, as the article points out, the Supreme Court ruled that the use of thermal imaging to detect heat lamps in a residence was a "search" under the 4th amendment and a warrant was needed. The case was U.S. v. Kyllo, and the opinion was written by Justice Scalia.
Update [2005-12-23 14:56:23 by georgia10]:: Does monitoring radiation levels constitute a "search" that requires a warrant? From Justice Scalia in Kyllo:
Where, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a "search" and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant.
Update [2005-12-23 15:46:3 by georgia10]:: To collectively address some of the issues raised in the comments:
1. Monitoring for radiation? Good! Busting into someone's house without a warrant to do it? Baaaad. Of course we want to know if someone is making a bomb in their basement! But would it hurt to give the judiciary a heads up....considering the Constitution requires it?
2. As I noted above, the most disturbing part of the story for me is the threats of reprisals for whistleblowers. Experts in the field had doubts about the legality of the actions taken. And they get threatened with termination for even asking about it? That, more than anything, sets off a flag for me.
Update [2005-12-23 16:3:31 by georgia10]:: The FBI
confirms the program, but says it didn't need warrants for the searches conducted on public property.
"FBI agents do not intrude across any constitutionally protected areas without the proper legal authority," the spokesman said.
The FBI does not specifically address the claim that officials entered private property without warrants.