Originally Posted by Kestrel
War in and of itself is not enough to suspend the Bill of Rights. The only war in which the right to due process was suspended was the American Civil War, and the Supreme Court found that to be unconstitutional. Also, the ruling I posted also clearly states that domestic security is not sufficient reason to eavesdrop, and that ruling was during the Cold War, arguably more tense and complex than our current situation.
Both rulings are the equivalent of law in the US. And, as the Constitution clearly states, no one is above the law, including the president. If he violates these rulings, he breaks the law, simple as that. Yeah, it makes his life tough, no doubt, but that's life. It's like the homeless guy who's hungry and steals food. Justified? Probably. Legal? No.
Well there are arguments both for and against it. You have put forth yours why it is bad and Chris has put forth ours why it is good. Both are grounded in facts and I choose the one I have as I feel it is the right course to protect this country.
Do you ever watch "The Shield"? I am going to guess that you view those cops as bad.