I wrote my Rep about the FISA bill. I wrote to thank her. I also had a suggestion. And some Constitutional law questions that Kossacks might actually have more informed answers on.
The problem is that secret laws have a hard time reaching a challenge in court because of "standing" issues. I won't waste space repeating what you're about to read in the email I sent.
My email to my Rep, Hilda Solis:
First, thankyou for your "no" vote on the recent FISA amendment. Thankyou for every other vote as well. You have never let me down. (I'm only a little bit shocked at Feinstein's Senate vote. sigh)
Second, while I have no idea how the FISA bill could have passed both Senate and House when it appears to contradict the 4th Amendment of the Constitution so blatantly, it did somehow pass. It cannot be allowed to stand.
It is the job of the Courts to determine the Constitutionality of laws. As I understand it, and my understanding may well be incomplete, an unconstitutional law must be first used in order for there to be a victim of it to bring a challenge of the law into court. The ACLU tried suing over warrantless wiretapping. The case was recently thrown out for lack of "standing." The ACLU could not prove that they or anyone they represent was actually wiretapped and as such, they had no standing to bring the case. Of course, since the program is secret, no one will ever have proof of tapping. No one will ever have "standing." It's like Catch-22.
So I ask, can Congress issue a challenge of a law to the Courts? Can Congress simply pass a motion to ask the Courts to determine if a law is Constitutional? Would the Courts oblige? If issues like "standing" come up, does Congress automatically have it? Can they legislate it for themselves if they don't?
There must be a way to get the courts to rule on the Constitutionality of warrantless wiretapping. I find it hard to believe that even a die-hard conservative judge like Alito could write a justification for why a Congressional law can Constitutionaly trump the 4th Amendment. It seems to me that this one is a no-brainer for any judge of any stripe. The problem is that all secret laws seem to have a de-facto protection from court challenge. I don't see how any citizen, or even citizen's groups like the ACLU, could ever get standing with the way things are now.
This could be an opportunity for some important Constitutional legislation. I know it will require much research and preparation, but I'd be proud if you were to introduce something to remedy the problem of un-challengable laws.
Thankyou,
George
So whaddya think? And is there a Constitutional lawyer in the house? I called first and the young and pleasant staffer was happy to hear my support for Solis' recent vote, but when I got into the other stuff I don't think she really understood, she wisely suggested I write it and email it. This, after being sure I had internet, I bet she would have transcribed word-for-word if I didn't. Ms. Solis' people have always been nice. I've called to thank her on several things.
So, any thoughts on un-challengable laws? Am I correct in my thinking here?