Rights and Privacy Erosion

[Racoon]

Get used to it.

In Bush's latest legal attempt to foil those criminals who might also use the mail system to further their dastardly ambitions...

 

Warrantless mail searches may be allowed

Civil libertarians alarmed; White House says stance is no change in policy:

 

The White House denies any change in policy, but civil libertarians are alarmed, saying the government has never publicly claimed that power before.

 

Federal law has long required a search warrant to open first class mail unless postal inspectors suspect it contains something dangerous, like a bomb or a hazardous chemical, reports NBC News' Pete Williams.

 

But in signing a postal bill just before Christmas, President Bush said federal law also gives the government authority to open the mail "for foreign intelligence collection."

 

White House spokesman Tony Snow said that's nothing new. “All this is saying is that there are provisions at law for — in exigent circumstances — for such inspections. It has been thus. This is not a change in law, this is not new.”

 

"What the signing statement indicates is what present law allows, in making it clear what the provisions are," Snow said Thursday in his daily briefing.

 

But members of Congress — Republicans and Democrats alike — say that's not what they intended the law to do. And they call it another example of a president claiming new legal authority while signing a bill into law.

 

“I was really surprised. There was absolutely nothing in the Postal Reform bill that in any way diminished or changed the privacy protections for domestic sealed mail,” Sen. Susan Collins of Maine said.

 

The law requires government agents to get warrants to open first-class letters.

 

But when Bush signed the Postal Reform act, he added a statement saying that his administration would construe that provision “in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent permissible, with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances. ...”

 

“The signing statement raises serious questions whether he is authorizing opening of mail contrary to the Constitution and to laws enacted by Congress,” said Ann Beeson, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union. “What is the purpose of the signing statement if it isn’t that?”

 

She said the group is planning to file request for information on how this exception will be used and also asking whether it has already been used to open mail.

 

 

Warrantless mail search may be allowed - U.S. Security - MSNBC.com

 

What do you think? precursors to a police state? or Big Brother doing everything it can to protect you?

[Buffy]

Signing statements are horridly underreported (its proof that there is no "liberal media bias"...), although Dan Froomkin at the Washington Post has been railing on it for a while and covered this exact topic in his column on Wednesday.

 

Basically these signing statements are not there in order to "change the law", they're "advisories" about how the Executive Branch will implement them, and it doesn't matter if this implemenation is in complete contravention to the statements in the law being signed. This is mainly to provide a paper trail whenever the Excutive Branch does "break" a law.

 

Cheney and Addison have been working very hard for the past six years to make a reality out of one of Richard Nixon's more famous quotes:

If the President does it, its not illegal.

 

Let's hope this doesn't go too much further now that we have Congress under control of the opposition.

 

Can you spell Constitutional Crisis,

Buffy

[Freddy]

Just when I thought I could not hate Bush and company more he finds another reason for me to!

[InfiniteNow]

Just when I thought I could not hate Bush and company more he finds another reason for me to!

 

If you would permit me to be so bold...

 

Try focussing on what you can do to improve the situation instead of the anger and hatred you feel.

 

Bush is a temporary leader, just as all are. Focus on how to make things better so your energy is better spent. (reminding myself of same).