Bush Stands By Wiretap Program
President Bush voiced strong objection Friday to a federal judge's ruling that his administration's warrantless wiretapping program was unconstitutional and should be shut down.
In his first public comment on the matter, Mr. Bush said he "strongly disagrees" with the judge's ruling and believes the program is needed to protect the nation, CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller reports.
"I would say that those who herald this decision simply do not understand the nature of the world in which we live. I strongly disagree with this decision," he told reporters at the presidential retreat in Camp David.
"We strongly believe it's constitutional and if al Qaeda is calling into the United States we want to know why they're calling," he said.
The Justice Department is appealing the ruling.
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy as well as the separation of powers enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.
"Plaintiffs have prevailed, and the public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution," Taylor wrote in her 43-page opinion.
The parties in the lawsuit agreed to a delay of the injunction to stop the surveillance until they can argue before Judge Taylor for a stay pending appeal, CBS News producer Beverley Lumpkin reports.
U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said the surveillance program has been "very effective" in protecting Americans.
"We believe very strongly that the program is lawful. ...," Gonzales said in Washington. "We respectfully disagree with the decision of the judge and have appealed the decision."
The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.
The ACLU said the state-secrets argument was irrelevant because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule.
"At its core, today's ruling addresses the abuse of presidential power and reaffirms the system of checks and balances that's necessary to our democracy," ACLU executive director Anthony Romero said in a conference call with reporters.
He called the opinion "another nail in the coffin in the Bush administration's legal strategy in the war on terror."
The Justice Department said it had appealed Taylor's ruling because the program is "an essential tool for the intelligence community in the War on Terror."
"In the ongoing conflict with al Qaeda and its allies, the President has the primary duty under the Constitution to protect the American people," the department said in a statement. "The Constitution gives the President the full authority necessary to carry out that solemn duty, and we believe the program is lawful and protects civil liberties."
Taylor's ruling won't take immediate effect. The Justice Department said it had reached an agreement with the ACLU to postpone implementing the order until Taylor hears its request for a stay pending appeal. A hearing on the motion was set for Sept. 7, Snow said.
While siding with the ACLU on the surveillance issue, Taylor dismissed a separate claim by the group over NSA data mining of phone records. She said not enough had been publicly revealed about that program to support the claim and further litigation would jeopardize state secrets.
The lawsuit alleged that the NSA "uses artificial intelligence aids to search for keywords and analyze patterns in millions of communications at any given time." Multiple lawsuits have been filed related to data mining against phone companies, accusing them of improperly turning over records to the NSA.
However, the data mining was only a small part of the Detroit suit, said Ann Beeson, the ACLU's associate legal director and the lead attorney on the case.
In the decision, Judge Taylor quoted Justice Earl Warren from the 1967 case, U.S. v Robel, Lumpkin reports.
"Implicit in the term 'national defense' is the notion of defending those values and ideas which set this Nation apart. ... It would indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion of ... those liberties ... which makes the defense of the Nation worthwhile," Taylor wrote.
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. In his first public comment on the matter, Mr. Bush said he "strongly disagrees" with the judge's ruling and believes the program is needed to protect the nation, CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller reports.
"I would say that those who herald this decision simply do not understand the nature of the world in which we live. I strongly disagree with this decision," he told reporters at the presidential retreat in Camp David.
"We strongly believe it's constitutional and if al Qaeda is calling into the United States we want to know why they're calling," he said.
The Justice Department is appealing the ruling.
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy as well as the separation of powers enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.
"Plaintiffs have prevailed, and the public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution," Taylor wrote in her 43-page opinion.
The parties in the lawsuit agreed to a delay of the injunction to stop the surveillance until they can argue before Judge Taylor for a stay pending appeal, CBS News producer Beverley Lumpkin reports.
U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said the surveillance program has been "very effective" in protecting Americans.
"We believe very strongly that the program is lawful. ...," Gonzales said in Washington. "We respectfully disagree with the decision of the judge and have appealed the decision."
The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs. They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, which involves monitoring phone calls and e-mails between people in the U.S. and those in other countries, without obtaining warrants from a judge, when a link to terrorism is suspected.
Read the district court opinion.
The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.
The ACLU said the state-secrets argument was irrelevant because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule.
"At its core, today's ruling addresses the abuse of presidential power and reaffirms the system of checks and balances that's necessary to our democracy," ACLU executive director Anthony Romero said in a conference call with reporters.
He called the opinion "another nail in the coffin in the Bush administration's legal strategy in the war on terror."
The Justice Department said it had appealed Taylor's ruling because the program is "an essential tool for the intelligence community in the War on Terror."
"In the ongoing conflict with al Qaeda and its allies, the President has the primary duty under the Constitution to protect the American people," the department said in a statement. "The Constitution gives the President the full authority necessary to carry out that solemn duty, and we believe the program is lawful and protects civil liberties."
Taylor's ruling won't take immediate effect. The Justice Department said it had reached an agreement with the ACLU to postpone implementing the order until Taylor hears its request for a stay pending appeal. A hearing on the motion was set for Sept. 7, Snow said.
While siding with the ACLU on the surveillance issue, Taylor dismissed a separate claim by the group over NSA data mining of phone records. She said not enough had been publicly revealed about that program to support the claim and further litigation would jeopardize state secrets.
The lawsuit alleged that the NSA "uses artificial intelligence aids to search for keywords and analyze patterns in millions of communications at any given time." Multiple lawsuits have been filed related to data mining against phone companies, accusing them of improperly turning over records to the NSA.
However, the data mining was only a small part of the Detroit suit, said Ann Beeson, the ACLU's associate legal director and the lead attorney on the case.
In the decision, Judge Taylor quoted Justice Earl Warren from the 1967 case, U.S. v Robel, Lumpkin reports.
"Implicit in the term 'national defense' is the notion of defending those values and ideas which set this Nation apart. ... It would indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion of ... those liberties ... which makes the defense of the Nation worthwhile," Taylor wrote.
Popular in Politics
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice" 296 Comments
- For GOP, scandals could be an electoral plus - or minus 124 Comments
- Where is the Benghazi cover-up Republicans promised? 381 Comments
- FBI seeks anonymous source behind Menendez allegations
- Ousted IRS chief: "I did not mislead" the American people 256 Comments
- Why Obama should worry that current scandals might impact 2016 226 Comments
- Obama: I didn't know about IRS report 613 Comments
- Immigration deal reached in House
For those of you who think this is a "Blood for Oil issue", what influence will the middle east have in the world, when the oil runs out. What contirubtions in the fields of science, art, or medicine have they made? Can you not see that they are willing to fight to the death to become something other than a 3rd world country.
Here is a quote (since you like quotes) that might help you understand their plight. --
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
John Stuart Mill (1806 - 1873)
Hmmm ... I wonder why no one realizes we are at war? In WWII, it wasn't a problem. Maybe because the war we are in now doesn't involve countries, armies, tanks, and planes. It is fought by miracle angels flying in the sky. So only the priviledge red-neck lunatics can see these angels, what a great mystery. Perhaps if I wish very hard, I can also see the war, this huge war, Newt Gingrich says it WWIII and he is magic. I see them! I can see the tanks and the planes fighting in the sky. I see now that the US is at war, not just for 4 years like WWII, but forever, against everyone in the whole world! Why are so many Americans mistaken? It must be you-know-who, the bad one, deceiving, yes that ol' prince of peace making us think that peace is the answer. When will our master, the prince of war, defeat him at last? Then we can have everyone "realize" we are at war, as death and mayhem rain down on the earth. Let us pray, red-neck cousins, let us pray for WWIII.
If you don't want to know the dangers you're being 'protected' from (by an entity as inefficient as government), you're a complete and total fool. Just because he won an election doesn't make him god or always right. But ok, go ahead and repeat after me... Our father, who art in Crawford, hallowed be thy war record. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is on your ranch. We are at war (echo: we are at war). Some people hate Americans for our freedom (echo: hate us for our freedom). We'll show them our love for freedom by forsaking it (echo: forsaking our personal freedom, for national security). Give us this day, our daily fear (echo: lest we forget each day is a gift to us from Bush who protects us.)
I support Bushes efforts and pray they will continue.
No one is saying he can't monitor terrorists calling in---He just can't monitor all US citizens, especially without a warrant!
Hey Bush---WE ARE NOT TERRORISTS, so go fight some terrorists somewhere besides MY house.