General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Now get this straight: Obama is NOT spying on Americans. [View all]A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)From your excerpt: the President had the inherent power to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance to collect foreign intelligence information
The OP was about Obama spying on Americas and the sub-thread we are now in is about it's constitutionality. The case you cited was also from an appeals court not the Supreme Court.
Did you even read what it said about United States vs Duggan? This case was initiated by an informant, not data mining. There was no data mining in this case, it was targeted wiretapping of three people based on information from a live person. I believe the informant equals probable cause. What you quote does not eliminate the probable cause part of the fourth amendment, just the warrant part. This case also involved people that wanted to buy and ship arms to Ireland for use against British soldiers, not use them in America, thus foreign involvement.
The reasoning behind not needing a warrant was to expedite the use of a wiretap to guarantee any pertinent information was gathered quickly and not lost, not to allow mass gathering of information.
Is my calling my brother one town over considered collecting foreign intelligence information? I can assure you neither I nor my brother are part of PIRA or the IRA.
A very interesting case and I think I remember reading about it at the time, but hardly a good excuse to allow data mining of American citizens without a warrant. But it does bring up another question. If as you say before FISA a President could wiretap without a warrant, why would any President back a law saying they needed one? Perhaps Jimmy Carter was the last President that believed in the Constitution, none since seem to want to follow it.