Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 03:16:05 UT
From: bush_stole_elect@fastmail.fm ("Mr.LiberalIII")
Subject: [azpeace] Fwd: [alts2war] Special Court Rejects Ashcroft Rules
To: azpeace@yahoogroups.com
Reply-To: azpeace@yahoogroups.com
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002 21:56:46 -0300, "Harold Rosenthal"
<halsue@erols.com> said:
> The purpose of Alts2War is to share ideas and information ... to make
> us more aware of the actual events going on around us that are being
> done in the name of "The War Against Terrorism." Please feel free to
> add your comments and insights. Without participation and
> communication from all of us, we will be totally dependent on
> government propaganda and censored news.
>
> Special Court Rejects Ashcroft Rules
>
> WASHINGTON (AP) - A special court that oversees sensitive law
> enforcement surveillance forced Attorney General John Ashcroft to
> change his guidelines for FBI terrorism searches and wiretaps,
> according to documents released Thursday.
>
> The U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has not
> publicly disclosed any of its rulings in nearly two decades,
> rejected some of the Ashcroft guidelines in May as ``not
> reasonably
>
> designed'' to safeguard the privacy of Americans.
>
> The Justice Department quickly amended its guidelines and won
> the court's approval. Nevertheless, Bush administration officials
> said Thursday they have appealed the restrictions, arguing that
> the
>
> new limits inhibit the sharing of information between terrorism
> investigators and criminal detectives.
>
> Justice Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock said the court
> has severely hampered the use of a broad anti-terrorism law that
> expanded the government's power to monitor people when terrorism
> is
>
> suspected.
>
> ``They have in our view incorrectly interpreted the Patriot Act,
> and the effect of that incorrect interpretation is to limit the
> kind of coordination that we think is very important,'' Comstock
> said.
>
> The Justice Department declined to release a copy of the appeal
> Thursday night to reporters. Officials said it was coincidence
> that
>
> the appeal was filed the same day the court made its ruling
> public.
>
> The court also disclosed the FBI acknowledged making more than
> 75 mistakes in applications for espionage and terrorism warrants
> under the surveillance law, including one instance in which former
> Director Louis Freeh gave inaccurate information to judges.
>
> ``How these misrepresentations occurred remains unexplained to
> the court,'' the special court said.
>
> The court's May 17 orders, signed by U.S. District Judge Royce
> Lamberth, were disclosed Thursday to the Senate Judiciary
> Committee, which has raised questions about the Justice
> Department's use of wiretap laws in espionage and terrorism cases.
>
> The court, now headed by U.S. District Judge Colleen
> Kollar-Kotelly, said it intended separately to publish the rulings
> and promised similarly to disclose any future unclassified orders.
>
> Ashcroft's instructions in March, in a memorandum to FBI
> Director Robert Mueller and senior Justice officials, made it
> easier for investigators in espionage and terrorism cases to share
> information from searches or wiretaps with FBI criminal
> investigators.
>
> But the surveillance court, which approves requests during
> secret deliberations, found that Ashcroft's rules could allow
> misuse of information in criminal cases, where prosecutors must
> meet higher legal standards to win approval for searches or
> wiretaps.
>
> ``These procedures cannot be used by the government to amend the
> (surveillance) act in ways Congress has not,'' the court wrote. In
> its rare public rebuke, it said the Justice Department spent
> ``considerable effort'' arguing its case, ``but the court is not
> persuaded.''
>
> Ashcroft had argued that, under changes authorized by the USA
> Patriot Act, the FBI could use the surveillance law to perform
> searches and wiretaps ``primarily for a law enforcement purpose,
> so
>
> long as a significant foreign intelligence purpose remains.''
>
> The Patriot Act, passed late in 2001, changed the surveillance
> law to permit its use when collecting information about foreign
> spies or terrorists is ``a significant purpose,'' rather than
> ``the
>
> purpose,'' of such an investigation. Critics at the time said they
> feared government might use the change as a loophole to employ
> espionage wiretaps in common criminal investigations.
>
> ``The attorney general seized authority that has not been
> granted to him by the constitution or the Congress,'' said Marc
> Rotenberg, head of the Washington-based Electronic Privacy
> Information Center.
>
> In a follow-up order also disclosed Thursday, the court accepted
> new Justice guidelines amending Ashcroft's instructions. The court
> also demanded to be told about any criminal investigations of
> targets under the surveillance act and about discussions between
> the FBI and prosecutors at Justice.
>
> ``The first Ashcroft order sort of snugged up against the new
> line that was being drawn, and that may not have been prudent,''
> said Stewart Baker, an expert on the law and former general
> counsel
>
> at the National Security Agency. ``You might be able to justify it
> legally, but I can see why the court would have reacted badly.''
>
> Stewart called the surveillance law ``a pretty heavy-duty
> weapon.''
>
> Critics have worried that the surveillance court is too closely
> allied with the government, noting that judges have rarely denied
> a
>
> request under the 1978 law. But the newly disclosed court's orders
> indicated irritation with serious FBI blunders in 2000 and 2001.
>
> The court said the FBI admitted in September 2000 to mistakes in
> 75 wiretap applications, including then-FBI Director Freeh's
> erroneous statement to judges that the target of a wiretap request
> wasn't also under criminal investigation.
>
> The court also noted that in March 2000, information from
> espionage wiretaps in at least four cases was passed illegally to
> FBI criminal investigators and U.S. prosecutors in New York.
> Clearly frustrated, the court said it barred one FBI agent from
> appearing before it.
>
> The FBI admitted more recently, in March 2001, that it
> inappropriately shared surveillance information among a squad of
> agents, the court said.
>
> ***************************
> Invite your friends to join our discussions. You are
> welcome to forward any of these messages as long as
> the subscribe/unsubscribe information is included.
> TO SUBSCRIBE: <alts2war-subscribe@topica.com>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: <alts2war-unsubscribe@topica.com>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
> is
> distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
> in receiving this information for research and educational purposes.
>
> ==^================================================================
> This email was sent to: bush_stole_elect@fastmail.fm
>
> EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84BIR.bafuTN
> Or send an email to: alts2war-unsubscribe@topica.com
>
> T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
> http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
> ==^================================================================
>
>
--
http://fastmail.fm - the way email *should* be
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now
http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/mG3HAA/MtTslB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
azpeace-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/