Democrats Hold Hearing on Illegal Spying
By Congressman John Conyers Jr.
Statement
Friday 20 January 2006
There can be no doubt that today we are in a constitutional crisis that threatens the system of checks and balances
that has preserved our fundamental freedoms for more than 200 years. There is no better illustration of that crisis than
the fact that the president is openly violating our nation's laws by authorizing the NSA to engage in warrantless
surveillance of US citizens.
The Bush Administration offers two arguments to justify their actions. First, they assert, that warrantless searches
were authorized by the Afghanistan use of force resolution. Second, they say, the Constitution permits and even mandates
such actions. To this member and indeed to most of our nation's legal community, neither argument is remotely plausible
or credible.
As for the Administration's claim of statutory authority, a plain reading of the text of the resolution reveals that
there is no reference whatsoever to domestic surveillance. Former Majority Leader Daschle told us that the resolution
was narrowed from the Administration's initial request to avoid such construction, and the Attorney General went so far
as to admit that they were told by Members of Congress that it would be "difficult if not impossible" to amend the law
to authorize such a program. As Harvard Law Professor Larry Tribe wrote me, "to argue that one couldn't have gotten
congressional authorization ... after arguing that ... one did get congressional authorization ... takes some nerve."
In terms of inherent constitutional authority, this too flies in the face of both common sense and legal precedent. If
the Supreme Court didn't let President Truman use this authority to take over the steel mills during the Korean War in
1952, and wouldn't let President Bush use the authority to indefinitely hold enemy combatants in 2005, it is quite
obvious the constitution doesn't allow warrantless wiretapping of US citizens today. As Justice O'Connor wrote, "a state
of war is not a blank check."
Perhaps what is most troubling of all is that if we let this domestic spying program continue, if we let this president
convince us that we are at war, so he can do what he wants, we will allow to stand the principle that the president
alone can decide what laws apply to him. I submit that is not only inconsistent with the principles upon which our
Republic was founded, it denigrates the very freedom we have been fighting for since the tragic events of September 11.
That is why we are holding today's hearing.
ENDS