IGNORANT OR JUST MEAN?

Again, in a speech in San Antonio yesterday, the president defended spying without court orders.  He relies heavily on the ideas of John Yoo, Stanford law rofessor and Alberto Gonzales, the attorney general.  In truth, these men are not experts on the Constitution any more than they grasp the Geneva Convention.  In www.watchingpolitics.com, early in October, I argued that they got the GC all wrong because they ignored Article 5 and leaned too heavily (and with misunderstanding) on Articles 1-4.   Once again they blunder and drag the president along.   (1) Broad searches of the sort the president condones under rubric of "national security" are what lawyers call "fishing expeditions" and these are precisely what the 4th Amendment rules out.   (2) Even without 4th Amendment protections, these searches are immoral.  The alleged good end cannot justify an evil means.   The leading constitutional authority of our generation, Ronald Dworkin, even says that grossly and deeply immoral conduct is by, that very fact, unconstitutional.

That seems right. The Constitution aims to be a great doctrine - a guide to conduct.  How can it command our respect unless it preserves our rights?  These rights don't grow out of the Constitution but precede them.

Sidney Gendin
www.watchingpolitics.com