Thursday, August 24, 2006

Debating the Merits of the Recent Wiretapping Decision

This month's Legal Intelligencer column, Debating the Merits of the Recent Wiretapping Decision, is now online at the Legal Intelligencer.

Most readers of this site are already aware of the Aug. 17 decision in the Eastern District of Michigan, ACLU v. NSA, in which U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor struck down as illegal and unconstitutional the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program confirmed to exist by President Bush. According to Taylor, the plaintiffs "prevailed, and the public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution."

The column links to online commentary from various attorneys concerning the merits of the decision, including Kevin A. Thompson at "Cyber Law Central", Eugene Volokh at the "Volokh Conspiracy", Scott Lemieux at "Lawyers, Guns & Money", Bryan Cunningham at the "National Review Online", Julian Ku at "Opinio Juris", Glenn Greenwald at "Unclaimed Territory", Jack Balkin at "Balkinization", Laurence Tribe also at Balkinization, Peter Shane at "Jurist", and Randy Gainer at the "Privacy and Security Law Blog".

Read the article by clicking here.

1 Comments:

Anonymous euphronius said...

I read you article in the LI. I thought you did an excellent job presenting the range of argument. I have been following the story pimarily through the blogs (Greenwald's spot mostly) and I though you presented everyone's opinion fairly.

I'm glad you didn't cover Althouse's travesty in the NYT. that was a disgrace.

4:54 PM, August 24, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home