Guest Post by Andrew P. Napolitano
If you plan to visit a college campus this month, don’t be surprised if you see signs and placards encouraging you to “Restore the Fourth.” Restore the Fourth is not about an athletic event or a holiday; it is about human freedom. The reference to “the Fourth” is to the Fourth Amendment, and it is badly in need of restoration.
In the dark days following 9/11, Congress enacted the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act has many flaws, including its prohibition of certain truthful public speech, but its most pernicious assault is on the constitutional right to privacy.
One of its sections permits federal agents to write their own search warrants and serve them on persons and entities who by law are the custodians of records about others, such as physicians, lawyers, bankers, telecoms, public utilities and computers servers. The same section of the act has been used perversely by the NSA and the secret FISA court to authorize the bulk collection of data.
Bulk collection of data — the indiscriminate governmental acquisition of the contents of emails, text messages, telephone calls, bank statements and credit card bills — is what the NSA seeks when it acquires all data in a specific area code or zip code or from a named provider, like Verizon, AT&T and Google.
What’s wrong with bulk collection? The warrant issued by the FISA court that authorizes bulk collection is known as a general warrant. A general warrant does not name a person or place, but authorizes the bearer to search wherever he wishes and seize whatever he finds. General warrants were a tool of colonial repression used by the king prior to the American Revolution. They were issued by secret courts in London. They were so loathed by the Framers that they are expressly forbidden by the Fourth Amendment.
The Fourth Amendment requires evidence — called probable cause — about a particular person, place or event to be presented to a judge and requires the judge to decide whether it is more likely than not that the government will find what it is looking for. The wording of the amendment could not be more precise, and in a Constitution known for vague language, this precision is instructive: All warrants must “particularly descr(ibe) the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” The Fourth Amendment protects all persons’ bodies, houses, papers and effects.
Yet the Patriot Act purports to avoid these requirements by permitting secret FISA court judges to authorize NSA agents to execute general warrants; thus, without probable cause and without describing the place to be searched or the person or thing to be seized.
The purpose of the Fourth Amendment is to prohibit government fishing expeditions, common to totalitarian countries. The theory of the Fourth Amendment is that a restrained government — restrained by an instrument the government cannot change, like the Constitution — is essential if people are to be free. The natural right protected by the Fourth Amendment is the right to be left alone.
Enter Restore the Fourth.
Restore the Fourth is a movement gaining steam now because the section of the Patriot Act that is so constitutionally offensive expires on May 31. President Obama wants it extended so his spies can continue their bulk collection of data. The Republican leadership in the Senate agrees with the president and accepts the myth that less freedom equals more security. The Republican leadership in the House has proposed a Band-Aid that would require the telecoms and computer service providers to sit on bulk data until the feds come calling, but to surrender it without the judicial finding of probable cause or specificity.
The Patriot Act should be repealed because it violates the Constitution and it doesn’t keep us safe. It renders us less safe and less free. The indiscriminate unconstitutional bulk collection of data is far too much raw material even for the 60,000 NSA agents and contractors to navigate. We saw that as recently as last weekend, when two jihadists known to the FBI and who had used email and cellphones attacked a free speech symposium outside of Dallas and were stopped at the last minute by courageous local police who saw their guns — not by federal spies’ warnings.
When longtime NSA Director Gen. Keith Alexander was asked under oath how many plots the NSA has stopped in 10 years, he stated 53. The next day, he modified his testimony to three, but declined to elaborate. Edward Snowden, whose revelations about NSA spying have never been refuted, says that no plots have been stopped because the NSA looks at everyone, rather than targeting the bad guys, as the probable cause requirement — if complied with — would induce it to do.
Americans are largely free because of the rule of law. The rule of law means a supreme law of the land to which even the government is subject, just as are all persons. Without the rule of law, we are subject to the rule of whoever runs the government, and our rights become licenses to be granted or denied by whoever runs the government. In that world, who or what would restrain the government? An unrestrained government is what we fought the American Revolution against.
That’s why we must Restore the Fourth.
“Americans are “largely” free because of the rule of law”……Thanks Judge…I like this guy…But I fear if we are trying to restore something that has been broken..Violated…We have already crossed that bridge..I’m not so sure we can get back to that safe place…There was a time when the Constitution was respected, laws were written to conform to the outlines layed down in the fine document we trust & live by..Now it seems like (The Constitution) is an annoyance to politicians…Mike In Ct
Generally I like and agree with the Judge but do disagree with him sometimes. None of it makes any difference because the Constitution is dead. The Judge is just talking about how many angels can dance on the head of a needle.
Federal Appeals Court Rules Mass NSA Spying On US Citizens Not Authorized By Patriot Act
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 05/07/2015 09:57 -0400
While Edward Snowden may be legally charged for treason in the US (even as he gets his own statue in Berlin), his contributions to US civil rights just got a huge validation by none other than the Federal appeals court which ruled moments ago that the National Security Agency’s controversial collection of millions of Americans’ phone records isn’t authorized by the Patriot Act, as the Bush and Obama administrations have long maintained.
It would appear America’s transformation into a “Big Brother” police state is not endorsed by every branch of the government after all.
As the WSJ reports, the ruling by the three-judge panel in New York “comes at a delicate point in the national debate over government surveillance, as Section 215 of the Patriot Act is due to expire next month and lawmakers are haggling about whether to renew it, modify it, or let it die.”
The court’s ruling came in a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union arguing the data collection should be stopped because it violates Americans’ privacy rights. A lower court judge ruled the program was constitutional, and the civil liberties group appealed, leading to Thursday’s decision.
“The text of (Section 215) cannot bear the weight the government asks us to assign to it, and…does not authorize the telephone metadata program,’’ the court wrote.
Ironically, the court declined to address the issue of whether the program violates Americans’ rights, because, they found, it was never properly authorized by existing law.
Of course, had it been authorized, the logical implication is that it would have been a violation, however score two for the government which not only did not legally implement mass spying on its citizens, but proceed to do so for years while violating the constitution.
But before anyone gets concerned that all their data will no longer be “backed up” by the NSA, fear not: the judges didn’t order the collection to stop, noting that the legislative debate and the looming expiration of Section 215 will force action on the issue one way or another.
The judges also note that if Congress decides to approve some version of the phone data collection program in coming days, then the privacy issue could be revisited in court.
The panel sent the case back to the lower court judge for further review based on the appeals court findings.
So to summarize: the NSA massive telephonic data collection is not legal, but it is still allowed to continue indefinitely. Even Turkey would approve.
Sounds good, judge. Let’s directly question each of the candidates running for Federal offices in 2016 and see whether THEY support restoring the fourth. As for me, where do I sign up?