3 ms·

I don’t understand. Isn’t the surveillance program illegal? Wouldn’t this be passing a law that would require the government follow the law? Serious question,

I don’t understand. Isn’t the surveillance program illegal? Wouldn’t this be passing a law that would require the government follow the law? Serious question, I was under the impression this was equivalent to warrantless wire tapping, which was already illegal.

hedora 6y ago
The executive branch (under GWB, Obama and Trump) has argued the law is ambiguous. Since congress just considered this amendment and rejected it, it will be harder for the Supreme Court to rule that the executive branch misinterpreted the law when it concluded that 100% digital surveillance is OK. We already have secret courts and indefinite pre-trial detention in the US. This is another small step in the creation of a police state. The precedent this vote created only took 37 votes in a chamber that is skewed much further right than the electorate. It would take about 55% of the vote to get the senate to be 50% democrat. That would give them enough procedural control to stop this sort of thing (if they bothered; they didn’t under Obama...) This is not democracy in action. This is democracy in its death throes.