Let's try to remember that Roberts is appointing individuals from the existing set of federal judges -- i.e., people who have already been appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the United States Senate as judges.
Did you know John Roberts is also chief justice of the NSA’s surveillance state?
21–30 of 134 posts
Re: Did you know John Roberts is also chief justice of the NSA’s surveillance state?
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I said, reasonable to point out the inaccuracy of the statement, but then there's a lot of substance to discuss after that. I think this article adds to the thesis that the NSA apparatus is not a product of democracy. While you can trace its origin to a law the people approved, it's no longer controlled by democracy. At least it wouldn't be if our leaders had their way, and people like Snowden and Ellsberg were si…
The FISC apparatus is a product of Congress. Democracy produced an outcome we (myself included) don't like. The majority of US citizens are more concerned about {the Soviets,Terrorism} than they are about NSA "accidentally" reading their emails. Appeals to "democracy" in discussions like these tend to have a whiff of "No True Scotsman" to them, where "democracy" is defined as the form of government which is subject t…
>The majority of US citizens are more concerned about {the Soviets,Terrorism} than they are about NSA "accidentally" reading their emails.
As somebody that's been on the ground passing out fliers for my town's restore the 4th rally that I helped organize yesterday, I've seen this apathy manifest itself not only in terms of disinterest, but also in outright anger that I would be so reckless and dangerous as to try and put pressure on our leaders to abide by the rule of law. I've been cussed out, called a communist by a military veteran, told to "get a job" (I actually have a great job), etc.
It seems that if an issue does not directly affect the lives of the masses negatively, such as the food shortage and economic instability that catalyzed the popular military coup in Egypt, the docile public will support whatever it is the powers that be tell them to. Here's to hoping some of the remaining leaked documents provide evidence of just that...
Re: Did you know John Roberts is also chief justice of the NSA’s surveillance state?
#23Oh, and one more thing: You have exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime power to shape the surveillance state. No, he doesn't. This is a directly, overtly inaccurate claim. John Roberts real exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime powers come from Article III of the US Constitution, which within 50 years of the ratification of the Constitution came to give the Supreme Court the power to review and overturn the laws of Congres…
Seems perfectly accurate to me. You seem to be quibbling over "lifetime" and "power to shape" while at the same time getting bogged down with legal issues. I find this strange since you have a reputation for being good at security, so it seems odd that you are missing what is effectively a social engineering attack on our legal code base. Everything you said makes sense from a legal point of view, and yet, this shit is clearly 100% unconstitutional. How can that happen? Because one pro-police-state judge and his hegemony have everyone buying into the narrative.
"Hello sir, this is the IT dept, can you confirm your password please?" .. "Oh sure, I believe you..."
"Hello senator, this is the FISC, can you keep this secret please because its all legal?" ... "Oh sure, I believe you..."
The icing on the cake is we don't have standing to sue because we can't prove we've been directly affected, but we can't prove it because we can't sue. As soon as a judge held this to be a lawful argument, we got rooted. The People are no longer in control.
Re: Did you know John Roberts is also chief justice of the NSA’s surveillance state?
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am certain that federal agencies have all sorts of whacked out "secret" interpretations of the laws of Congress. They get to do that because Congress passes janky laws that deliberately delegate authority to the agencies to come up with the specific line item regulations that animate the laws. Congress needs to stop doing that, across the board. This is also the basis of the "3 Felonies A Week" problem (that, and t…
I am certain that federal agencies have all sorts of whacked out "secret" interpretations of the laws of Congress. And because John Roberts apoints FISC judges, he chooses those who secretly interpret the law. That's pretty much like deciding how to interpret the law. And in secret. What it's actually deciding the law itself. And, again, secretly. Your latest comment contradicts your OP " No, he doesn't. This is a di…
FISC is an instrument of Congress. It was a way of punting on finicky rulemaking for foreign surveillance by appointing an independent review board. No matter what NSA's "interpretations" of the law are, that discretion is enabled --- deliberately --- by Congress, and can be eliminated by Congress.
Re: Did you know John Roberts is also chief justice of the NSA’s surveillance state?
#25Oh, and one more thing: You have exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime power to shape the surveillance state. No, he doesn't. This is a directly, overtly inaccurate claim. John Roberts real exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime powers come from Article III of the US Constitution, which within 50 years of the ratification of the Constitution came to give the Supreme Court the power to review and overturn the laws of Congres…
I'm willing to forgive Ezra his hyperbole here; the rest of the article was fairly illuminating.
Your central claim seems to be that our man JR only has authority to appoint federal judges to FISC for 7 year tenures, but cannot alter how FISC itself works, and in any case he can't stop citizens from challenging the surveillance state through all the well-known avenues. Therefore he doesn't have "exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime" power.
I agree that this characterization precludes JR from "exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime" power but I don't think it stops him from exercising a surprising amount of it. I particularly enjoyed this synopsis from Klein:
The FISA court is composed of federal judges. All are appointed by the same man. All but one hail from the same political party. And unlike judges in normal courts, FISA judges don’t hear opposing testimony or feel pressure from colleagues or the public to moderate their rulings.
The power to pick and choose who gets to interpret the laws Congress might set is quite substantial in its own right. It's true that if Congress banned all surveillance the judges would have limited power, and so too would JR's power be limited.
But on the other hand, if Congress chose some other slightly more complicated law to limit surveillance, his power would increase. For any moderately complex legal document, there is substantial latitude in how intelligent people reasonably interpret it. This allows, for example, smart SCOTUS judges to disagree quite substantially in their interpretation of the Bill of Rights. More pertinently, it allows one of the authors of the Patriot Act to ask in confusion how it enabled the current surveillance.
The power to pick and choose those who consistently swing one way or another on the question of surveillance, for whatever benign, intelligent reasons, might not be an "exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime" one, but it's substantial enough to give me pause.
You know I enjoy your comments, and my long disagreement here is a sign of respect, not antipathy.
Re: Did you know John Roberts is also chief justice of the NSA’s surveillance state?
#26Oh, and one more thing: You have exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime power to shape the surveillance state. No, he doesn't. This is a directly, overtly inaccurate claim. John Roberts real exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime powers come from Article III of the US Constitution, which within 50 years of the ratification of the Constitution came to give the Supreme Court the power to review and overturn the laws of Congres…
Seems perfectly accurate to me. You seem to be quibbling over "lifetime" and "power to shape" while at the same time getting bogged down with legal issues. I find this strange since you have a reputation for being good at security, so it seems odd that you are missing what is effectively a social engineering attack on our legal code base. Everything you said makes sense from a legal point of view, and yet, this shit…
Yes, I'm quibbling over "lifetime" when the power he has isn't lifetime, "exclusive" when it's a power delegated to him by the discretion of Congress, and "unaccountable" when his role is as an instrument of Congress. Congress cannot effectively recall Roberts from the Supreme Court, but the same majority of Congress that could pass a national fuel standard law could remove Roberts from the FISC.
Re: Did you know John Roberts is also chief justice of the NSA’s surveillance state?
#27Oh, and one more thing: You have exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime power to shape the surveillance state. No, he doesn't. This is a directly, overtly inaccurate claim. John Roberts real exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime powers come from Article III of the US Constitution, which within 50 years of the ratification of the Constitution came to give the Supreme Court the power to review and overturn the laws of Congres…
I'm willing to forgive Ezra his hyperbole here; the rest of the article was fairly illuminating. Your central claim seems to be that our man JR only has authority to appoint federal judges to FISC for 7 year tenures, but cannot alter how FISC itself works, and in any case he can't stop citizens from challenging the surveillance state through all the well-known avenues. Therefore he doesn't have "exclusive, unaccounta…
Thanks! Consider this: Congress could next week pass a law requiring Roberts to appoint an equal number of judges appointed by Democratic administrations as by Republican administrations. Roberts could do nothing to stop them.
Re: Did you know John Roberts is also chief justice of the NSA’s surveillance state?
#28Oh, and one more thing: You have exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime power to shape the surveillance state. No, he doesn't. This is a directly, overtly inaccurate claim. John Roberts real exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime powers come from Article III of the US Constitution, which within 50 years of the ratification of the Constitution came to give the Supreme Court the power to review and overturn the laws of Congres…
Attacking the rhetoric is weak. He can and does appoint judges from his own party and ideology, almost exclusively. He does have the power to re-appoint or not re-appoint said judges at the conclusion of these terms. So, he has been given a lot of power. It's reasonable to point out that congress can get rid of FISA, but it doesn't address the argument being made here in totality.
>>> He can and does appoint judges from his own party and ideology
As opposed to the president who never appoints Supreme Court judges from his own party and ideology, right? And unlike FISA judges, those judges have vast powers. If you're worried about politics in court, you're very late to the game - SC judges were appointed politically for a long time.
>>> So, he has been given a lot of power.
Yes, Supreme Court Chief Justice has a lot of power. Is it really news to anybody? He's the head of the one of the independent branches of the government, of course he has a lot of power.
Re: Did you know John Roberts is also chief justice of the NSA’s surveillance state?
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
there's nothing they can do except to ensure that the next judges appointed to the courts are more congenial to their views. Which is precisely what Roberts can do when he appoints FISC judges. In the same way that the President/Senate can't control the SCOTUS, but they are definitely picking on ideology first and foremost, with some degree of confidence that decisions will align with that ideology.
No. Congress can recall any FISC judge, revoke Roberts authority over FISC at any time or abolish the FISC court entirely.
>>Congress can recall any FISC judge
I don't think Congress has an ability to withdraw a judge. The only check on an individual judge is the term limits which has been ruled before not to matter in its determination that the FISA court acts like an article III court. Congress simply couldn't remove a judge except though impeachment.
Re: Did you know John Roberts is also chief justice of the NSA’s surveillance state?
#30Oh, and one more thing: You have exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime power to shape the surveillance state. No, he doesn't. This is a directly, overtly inaccurate claim. John Roberts real exclusive, unaccountable, lifetime powers come from Article III of the US Constitution, which within 50 years of the ratification of the Constitution came to give the Supreme Court the power to review and overturn the laws of Congres…
Seems perfectly accurate to me. You seem to be quibbling over "lifetime" and "power to shape" while at the same time getting bogged down with legal issues. I find this strange since you have a reputation for being good at security, so it seems odd that you are missing what is effectively a social engineering attack on our legal code base. Everything you said makes sense from a legal point of view, and yet, this shit…
FISC can not call senators and ask them for anything. NSA has to call FISC and ask them if it is legal, if they confirm, NSA can proceed. FISC has no power over senators - if any senator decides something is wrong with surveillance, he can initiate a bill that says you need more approval than FISC or you can't do certain things at all - FISC only confirms that NSA is acting withing the limits that the senators (and the House of course) set the last time. FISC can not create rules - unlike SC, btw, that to a large measure can interfere with the rules, even though Roberts seem to be rather restrained from doing this in many cases where he had a possibility to do so (see Obamacare decision, for example). FISC can only say if NSA follows the rules - and it is the senator that makes the rules.