> FISC judges issue warrants which can be overturned by federal courts. The FISC isn't "supreme" and is in fact subject to the judgements of SCOTUS. I admit th

> FISC judges issue warrants which can be overturned by federal courts. The FISC isn't "supreme" and is in fact subject to the judgements of SCOTUS. I admit this thought crossed my mind as well when I read the article. But then I realized that federal court review of FISC decisions doesn't mean much when there is nobody to appeal the decisions of FISC to those federal courts. The FISC warrants hearings are ex parte, and the vast majority of them are granted. The government won't appeal their victories. They probably don't appeal their losses either, electing instead to refine their evidence and apply again in that sliver of cases where their initial warrant request is denied. For all practical purposes, then, FISC is supreme. With no mechanism for their decisions to reach the normal federal court system, their secret decisions stand unchallenged and those secret decisions stand as precedent for future cases that come before FISC. A question for someone more familiar with federal courts than I: can higher federal courts review the decisions of lower courts without any party making such a request, or must cases reach higher courts only on appeal?