A federal judge in Detroit ruled Thursday that the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance program is unconstitutional, delivering the first decision that the Bush administration’s effort to monitor communications without court oversight runs afoul of the Bill of Rights and federal law.
U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ordered a halt to the wiretap program, secretly authorized by Bush in 2001, but both sides in the lawsuit agreed to delay that action while the Justice Department appeals her decision.
Legal scholars said Taylor’s decision is likely to receive heavy scrutiny from the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, and some criticized her ruling as poorly reasoned.
Ruling in a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups in the Eastern District of Michigan, Taylor said that the NSA wiretapping program, aimed at communications by potential terrorists, violates privacy and free-speech rights and the constitutional separation of powers among the three branches of government.
She also found that the wiretaps violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the 1978 law enacted to provide judicial oversight of clandestine surveillance within the United States.
“It was never the intent of the framers to give the president such unfettered control, particularly where his actions blatantly disregard the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights,” Taylor wrote in her opinion.
The ruling is the latest courtroom setback for the Bush administration’s controversial anti-terrorism and detention policies.
In a case in June, the Supreme Court rejected Bush’s claims of executive power, ruling 5-3 that special military trials for alleged terrorists were not authorized under federal law and ran afoul of the Geneva Conventions.
The latest decision could complicate efforts by the White House and Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., to win approval for a bill that would allow, but not require, Bush to submit the NSA program to a secret court for legal review.
The eavesdropping program, revealed in news reports in December 2005, allows the NSA to intercept telephone calls and e-mails between the United States and overseas without court approval in cases where the government suspects one party of having links to terrorism.
The NSA refused to discuss the ruling or whether it had suspended any surveillance activities.
Several dozen court lawsuits have been filed around the country challenging the program’s legality, but Thursday’s ruling marked the first time that a judge had ruled it unconstitutional. Experts in national security law argued, however, that Taylor offered meager support for her findings on separation of powers and other key issues.
“Regardless of what your position is on the merits of the issue, there’s no question that it’s a poorly reasoned decision,” said Bobby Chesney, a national security law specialist at Wake Forest University who takes a moderate stance on the legal debate over the NSA program.
