As we expected, Bush's justice department is now calling for the dismissal of the warrentless wiretapping lawsuit, because now he is "obeying the law". AG now states that they have decided to follow the law of the land (believe it when I see it), because the FISA court has decided to play ball with the Administration.
A memo from Gonzales to Patrick Leahy and Arlen Specter; (slightly redacted from the above link to tpmmuckraker)
"I am writing to inform you that on Jan 10, 2007, a judge of the FISA court issued orders authorizing the Gov to target for collection international communications into or out of the US where there is probable cause to believe that one of the communicants is a terorist. As a result of these orders, any electronic surveillance that was occuring as part of the TSP will now be conducted subject to the apporoval of the FISA court".
Now, of course, if the Gov had had evidence that there was "probable cause" to suspect that one of the individuals in the phone conversation was a terrorist PRIOR to Jan 10, 2007, then they could have gone to the FISA court and easily obtained a warrant. So, why then, did they go outside of the law to WARRANTLESS wiretaps? According to Gonzales' memo, there is no difference between what the law was then and what the FISA court will accept now. The FISA court will accept "probable cause" as a reason to provide a warrant.
I'll not go into speculation about that, just let it stand.
But now, the Justice Department is actively trying to kill the lawsuit challenging the NSA brought forth by the ACLU and other plaintiffs, based on the fact that the NSA is NOW "following the law"!!
A lawsuit challenging the legality of the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance program should be thrown out because the government is now conducting the wiretaps under the authority of a secret intelligence court, according to court papers filed by the Justice Department yesterday.
In a filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, in Cincinnati, Justice Department lawyers said the lawsuit of the American Civil Liberties Union and other plaintiffs -- which received a favorable ruling from a federal judge in Detroit -- should be considered moot because the case "no longer has any live significance."
"Yes, I've been breaking the law for the last five years, but now I've decided to follow the brand spanking new law, which I have had the honor of creating, so I will no longer break the old laws, which I did not create".
The government contends that the new arrangement essentially invalidates an August ruling in the ACLU case by U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, who declared the surveillance program unconstitutional and ordered it halted. The government appealed to the 6th Circuit court. It wants Taylor's ruling vacated and the lawsuit dismissed.
How CONVENIENT!