Wiretapping program raises legal questions

After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the Bush administration made a commitment to defeat terrorism in every way it knew possible. Now some people think it has gone too far.\nLast month, The New York Times reported that a government insider had leaked information showing that the Bush administration has been allowing the National Security Agency to conduct warrantless international wiretapping on calls from a person in the United States to a person abroad on terrorist suspects and those tied to terrorists since Sept. 11, 2001.\nSome claim what the president is doing is unconstitutional and illegal, while President Bush and supporters defend his right to exercise his commander-in-chief powers, overriding the other two branches of government for the sake of national security.\nLaw professor Dawn Johnsen is troubled by Bush's policy.\n"I think it's illegal for the president to be using his powers in this way," she said. "He's going too far."\nJohnsen said the way the Bush administration has gone about managing the wiretapping is illegal, not the wiretapping itself. \n"It's the secrecy, and the president acting contrary to laws, that are definitely unconstitutional," Johnsen said. "He hasn't demonstrated why he needs to do this to the public, and in a sense is saying, 'I'm not going to comply with congressional authority.'"\nThere are many things the government keeps covert out of security concerns. That's where the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act comes in. The act was implemented in 1978 to allow for judicial authorization for surveillance against suspected international terrorists and espionage acts, according the FISA Web site.\nIn this particular situation, Johnsen said the president should have sought approval for the international wiretapping from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, where the process would have been kept quiet so as not to expose covert operations. In emergencies, the president is allowed to go ahead with these procedures as long as he seeks the court's approval within 72 hours. Johnsen said she believes that it is most suspicious that Bush did not go to the FISC.\n"They (the FISC) almost always grant these types of government procedures," she said.\nThe Bush administration, however, continues to defend the NSA international eavesdropping program, saying that the president is acting consistently with his inherent executive powers stated in the Constitution. On Thursday, the Department of Justice released a 42-page justification of the NSA international eavesdropping program. \nThe release explains the administration's reasoning for the warrantless eavesdropping, stating that the wiretaps were only used to intercept communication into and out of the United States by suspected al-Qaida operatives. It also justifies the action by saying Bush is exercising his powers authorized by Congress to use force against any organization suspected of terrorist activities.\nSophomore Ali McCormick said she agreed with Bush's program and the way it was implemented.\n"Congressional leaders have been asked for their approval or disapproval on the National Security Agency's ability to wiretap without first obtaining a court order," she said. "President Bush has only bypassed FISA for a select number of suspects. Additionally, FISA has been undergoing a sort of overhaul since Sept. 11, (2001), concerning the rules that govern it."\nThat reasoning has also been consistently used as defense from the Bush administration, and it isn't backing down from its position that Bush has the right to execute eavesdropping orders without search warrants.\n"Obviously the president is doing what he and his cabinet members believe is in the country's best interest," McCormick said.\nMcCormick represents the majority of U.S. citizens, according to a Rasmussen Reports poll, which found 64 percent of Americans believe the NSA is doing the right thing. Some, however, are still not convinced it's the right thing, regardless of President Bush's intentions.\nAlthough the country has experienced an elevated level of fear since Sept. 11, 2001, senior Theo Lutz said he doesn't believe that should be the reason to take away his rights.\n"(Bush) probably did think the eavesdropping is in the best interest of the country; otherwise he wouldn't have done it," Lutz said. "But President Bush does not have a monopoly on deciding what's in the best interest of the country."\nThe Senate Judiciary Committee will begin open hearings on the international eavesdropping program Feb. 6.