Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Secret law is not law. It is a fundamental breach of the social contract . [View all]ProSense
(116,464 posts)16. The FISA law
"Secret law is not law. It is a fundamental breach of the social contract ."
...isn't secret, its execution is secret. Congress has oversight.
This brings to mind two questions: 1) Why isn't Congress more proactive in terms of oversight 2) What level of transparency is reasonable? Senators Leahy, Udall and Wyden support the a fix.
Do you support Senator Leahy's Patriot Act/FISA reform bill?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023135750
The FISA law and secret court were established following the Chuch Committee recommendations.
Introduced in the Senate as S. 1566 by Edward Kennedy (DMA) on May 18, 1977
Committee consideration by: Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Committee on the Judiciary
Passed the Senate on March 20, 1978 (95-1)
Passed the House on September 7, 1978 (246-128)
Reported by the joint conference committee on October 5, 1978; agreed to by the Senate on October 9, 1978 (Without objection) and by the House on October 12, 1978 (226-176)
Signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on October 25, 1978
Committee consideration by: Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Committee on the Judiciary
Passed the Senate on March 20, 1978 (95-1)
Passed the House on September 7, 1978 (246-128)
Reported by the joint conference committee on October 5, 1978; agreed to by the Senate on October 9, 1978 (Without objection) and by the House on October 12, 1978 (226-176)
Signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on October 25, 1978
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was introduced on May 18, 1977, by Senator Ted Kennedy and was signed into law by President Carter in 1978. The bill was cosponsored by nine Senators: Birch Bayh, James O. Eastland, Jake Garn, Walter Huddleston, Daniel Inouye, Charles Mathias, John L. McClellan, Gaylord Nelson, and Strom Thurmond.
The FISA resulted from extensive investigations by Senate Committees into the legality of domestic intelligence activities. These investigations were led separately by Sam Ervin and Frank Church in 1978 as a response to President Richard Nixons usage of federal resources to spy on political and activist groups, which violates the Fourth Amendment.[4] The act was created to provide Judicial and congressional oversight of the government's covert surveillance activities of foreign entities and individuals in the United States, while maintaining the secrecy needed to protect national security. It allowed surveillance, without court order, within the United States for up to one year unless the "surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party". If a United States person is involved, judicial authorization was required within 72 hours after surveillance begins.
The FISA resulted from extensive investigations by Senate Committees into the legality of domestic intelligence activities. These investigations were led separately by Sam Ervin and Frank Church in 1978 as a response to President Richard Nixons usage of federal resources to spy on political and activist groups, which violates the Fourth Amendment.[4] The act was created to provide Judicial and congressional oversight of the government's covert surveillance activities of foreign entities and individuals in the United States, while maintaining the secrecy needed to protect national security. It allowed surveillance, without court order, within the United States for up to one year unless the "surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party". If a United States person is involved, judicial authorization was required within 72 hours after surveillance begins.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act
If the Patriot Act is repealed, should the secret FISA Court be abolished?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022999502
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
79 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Secret law is not law. It is a fundamental breach of the social contract . [View all]
kpete
Jul 2013
OP
yeah, but most Americans are too fat and happy in their illusions that they actually matter
Nanjing to Seoul
Jul 2013
#2
Most Americans are in various stages of denial making it easy for the tyrants. nm
rhett o rick
Jul 2013
#8
No, it isn't a plebiscite on every law, but in a representative democracy a law has to be known.
enough
Jul 2013
#7
this is one point that I don't understand about the surveillance state debate....
mike_c
Jul 2013
#4
Yes, many people live in total deniablity, thinking that the authoritarian state will
rhett o rick
Jul 2013
#69
As Ron Wyden has said, 'if the people knew how they are using the law they would be
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#5
It should be noted that those decisions were made in a vastly different world.
Romulus Quirinus
Jul 2013
#19
I assume that you are arguing in good faith. I would appreciate it if you would do the same for me.
Romulus Quirinus
Jul 2013
#49
You do realize that this isn't the opinion of the court, but a quote from the amicae curiae brief
Romulus Quirinus
Jul 2013
#52
Here is an article in from Dr. Anthony Clark Arend of Georgetown University
Romulus Quirinus
Jul 2013
#54
According to the ACLU, it is the USA PATRIOT act which enables this level of surveillance, rather
Romulus Quirinus
Jul 2013
#56
Again I have to ask: why do some here trust 10 Repub judges to secretly define privacy?
magellan
Jul 2013
#13
It's debatable if you can even call it "law." It certainly isn't legal, no matter how the courts
leveymg
Jul 2013
#31
The rulings and interpretations are the substance of the law, the statute is just black letter
leveymg
Jul 2013
#66
No. Records are rarely sealed, except in FISA/nat'l security, and some civil cases by agreement.
leveymg
Jul 2013
#77
It appears Obama does not agree and is fighting to keep mysterious redefinitions of our law secret.
Dragonfli
Jul 2013
#58
But it sound like either the whole House or Senate is required to vote on it...
kentuck
Jul 2013
#75