The year 2007 was a tough one for civil libertarians and, by extension, for everyone who lives under the protection of the U.S. Constitution. The notion, which gained credence after the 9/11 attacks, that to defend the U.S. against foreign and domestic enemies requires turning away from our founding constitutional guarantees of freedom, has held sway despite political changes in Congress. The Bill of Rights has never been so under attack as it was over the past year.

Let's look at just one example of how Americans' liberties have been compromised: The National Security Agency, with the full backing of the White House, several years ago enlisted the support of a number of telecommunications firms to spy on American citizens' communica tions. This is new -- before, administration agencies would have to go to a secret court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, for warrants. Under this new approach, anyone in the country can be spied on without a warrant, without any court's approval.

One telecommunications firm, Qwest, refused to go along with this scheme. According to newspaper sources, insiders say the ar rangement could have permitted warrantless neighborhood surveil lance of phone traffic -- almost all of them domestic phone calls.

Now, the White House and many lawmakers want to give these private firms immunity against lawsuits by those Americans who were spied on. At the same time, no one has revealed exactly who did what to whom. So the White House, and its congressional apologists, are asking for the equivalent of a pardon before the public knows the scope of any illegal actions.

"So what?" you ask. "I've got nothing to hide." But the Founders created the Fourth Amendment for a reason. In part, they wrote: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause. ..." William Cuddihy, a leading Fourth Amendment scholar, has noted that "reasonable search and seizure in colonial America closely approximated whatever the searcher thought reasonable." Now, with another George in control (even as his power wanes), we are perilously close to the same place we were some 200-odd years ago.

Christopher Dodd, the Democratic senator from Connecticut, should be thanked for, late in 2007, single-handedly blocking the Senate from passing a White House- backed surveillance bill that would have granted immunity to telecom munications firms that may well have violated these Constitutional guarantees. A FISA bill (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Modernization Act) passed by the Senate Tuesday, allows warrantless government eavesdropping on American citizens and grants immunity to telecommunications companies. Who will stand up for the Constitution now?

We have heard from a number of congressional sources that 2008, an election year, is not a good time for rolling back the post-9/11 laws that increasingly limit the freedom, privacy and voting privileges of Americans. These laws include the Patriot Act, which greatly expanded the scope of National Secu rity Letters to limit freedom of speech and association; the Military Commissions Act, which limits the ancient right of habeas corpus (without which anyone can be put in jail for the duration of the jailer's convenience), and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Modernization Act, which allows warrantless eavesdropping on Americans.

For administration defenders, security trumps civil liberties. Sure, they say, maybe a citizen may lose some cosmetic rights, but that is necessary to defend against our enemies. But that argument is hol low, for what did the Founders strive for, and our soldiers in many wars fight and die for, if not for our liberties, the foundations of which reach deep into our legal and constitutional structures? Weaken these bedrock legal and constitutional structures, and our liberties fall.

This year, 2008, will not only be a traditional political battleground between the parties and their candidates. It will be a critical year when Americans' freedoms are in the balance. As citizens, we need to be safe not only from external threats, but from the potential loss of the freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution's Bill of Rights. And these are not difficult choices. America's ideological enemies would be quite happy if we lay down their freedoms for a pocketful of false security. Our enemies would win the war without a battle. Remarkably, although our politicians take an oath to defend the Constitution, their defense has been at best half-hearted. This year we must demand from all of our representatives and political leaders their commitment to defend not only the physical territory of the United States, but also the historical legacy of our freedoms. One means nothing without the other.

By contrast, one of our political leaders, our own Rep. Rush Holt, D-Hopewell Township, representing New Jersey's 12th Congressional District, has been a leader in defending our constitutional rights. He has written recently that he has worked through specific legislation to prevent "this or any other President a permanent blank check to spy on you, your family, the members of your congregation, or any other American citizen without any judicial oversight -- a position shared by an overwhelming majority of Americans, according to the latest public opinion surveys on the topic."

Stay tuned: 2008 may be a turning point in the struggle of Americans to retain their constitutional rights -- but the Constitution will protect our rights only if we protect the Constitution -- and we demand that our politicians honor their oath of office.

Source: http://www.nj.com/opinion/times/editorials/index.ssf?/base/news-0/120305193178660.xml&coll=5

---

Be first to comment this article

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6
AkoComment © Copyright 2004 by Arthur Konze - www.mamboportal.com
All right reserved