Home
In this issue
April 9, 2014

Jonathan Tobin: Why Did Kerry Lie About Israeli Blame?

Samuel G. Freedman: A resolution 70 years later for a father's unsettling legacy of ashes from Dachau

Jessica Ivins: A resolution 70 years later for a father's unsettling legacy of ashes from Dachau

Kim Giles: Asking for help is not weakness

Kathy Kristof and Barbara Hoch Marcus: 7 Great Growth Israeli Stocks

Matthew Mientka: How Beans, Peas, And Chickpeas Cleanse Bad Cholesterol and Lowers Risk of Heart Disease

Sabrina Bachai: 5 At-Home Treatments For Headaches

The Kosher Gourmet by Daniel Neman Have yourself a matzo ball: The secrets bubby never told you and recipes she could have never imagined

April 8, 2014

Lori Nawyn: At Your Wit's End and Back: Finding Peace

Susan B. Garland and Rachel L. Sheedy: Strategies Married Couples Can Use to Boost Benefits

David Muhlbaum: Smart Tax Deductions Non-Itemizers Can Claim

Jill Weisenberger, M.S., R.D.N., C.D.E : Before You Lose Your Mental Edge

Dana Dovey: Coffee Drinkers Rejoice! Your Cup Of Joe Can Prevent Death From Liver Disease

Chris Weller: Electric 'Thinking Cap' Puts Your Brain Power Into High Gear

The Kosher Gourmet by Marlene Parrish A gift of hazelnuts keeps giving --- for a variety of nutty recipes: Entree, side, soup, dessert

April 4, 2014

Rabbi David Gutterman: The Word for Nothing Means Everything

Charles Krauthammer: Kerry's folly, Chapter 3

Amy Peterson: A life of love: How to build lasting relationships with your children

John Ericson: Older Women: Save Your Heart, Prevent Stroke Don't Drink Diet

John Ericson: Why 50 million Americans will still have spring allergies after taking meds

Cameron Huddleston: Best and Worst Buys of April 2014

Stacy Rapacon: Great Mutual Funds for Young Investors

Sarah Boesveld: Teacher keeps promise to mail thousands of former students letters written by their past selves

The Kosher Gourmet by Sharon Thompson Anyone can make a salad, you say. But can they make a great salad? (SECRETS, TESTED TECHNIQUES + 4 RECIPES, INCLUDING DRESSINGS)

April 2, 2014

Paul Greenberg: Death and joy in the spring

Dan Barry: Should South Carolina Jews be forced to maintain this chimney built by Germans serving the Nazis?

Mayra Bitsko: Save me! An alien took over my child's personality

Frank Clayton: Get happy: 20 scientifically proven happiness activities

Susan Scutti: It's Genetic! Obesity and the 'Carb Breakdown' Gene

Lecia Bushak: Why Hand Sanitizer May Actually Harm Your Health

Stacy Rapacon: Great Funds You Can Own for $500 or Less

Cameron Huddleston: 7 Ways to Save on Home Decor

The Kosher Gourmet by Steve Petusevsky Exploring ingredients as edible-stuffed containers (TWO RECIPES + TIPS & TECHINQUES)

Jewish World Review Feb 27, 2014 /27 Adar I, 5774

New Assaults on American Law

By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano



http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | n the months since Edward Snowden revealed the nature and extent of the spying that the National Security Agency (NSA) has been perpetrating upon Americans and foreigners, some of the NSA's most troublesome behavior has not been a part of the public debate. This behavior constitutes the government's assaults on the American legal system. Those assaults have been conducted thus far on two fronts, one of which is aimed at lawyers who represent foreign entities here in America, and the other is aimed at lawyers who represent criminal defendants against whom evidence has been obtained unlawfully and presented in court untruthfully.

Investigative reporters at The New York Times recently discovered that the NSA has been listening to the telephone conversations between lawyers at a highly regarded Chicago law firm and their clients in Indonesia. The firm, Mayer Brown, has remained publicly silent about the revelations, as has its client, the government of Indonesia. But it is well known that Mayer Brown represents the government of Indonesia concerning trade regulations that govern exports of cigarettes and shrimp to the U.S. The lawyers on the other side of the bargaining table from Mayer Brown work for the federal government, which also employs, of course, the NSA.

Can the NSA lawfully tell lawyers for the government who are negotiating with Mayer Brown lawyers what it overheard between the Mayer Brown lawyers and their client? The answer, incredibly, is: Yes. Federal rules prohibit the NSA from sharing knowledge with lawyers for the federal government only about persons who have been indicted. In this case, Mayer Brown is attempting to negotiate favorable trade relations between Indonesia and the U.S., and the lawyers for the U.S. have the unfair advantage of knowing in advance the needs, negotiating positions and strategy of their adversaries. In the Obama years, this is how the feds work: secretly, unfairly and in utter derogation of the attorney-client privilege.

For 100 years, that privilege — the right of lawyers and their clients to speak freely and without the knowledge of the government or their adversaries — has been respected in the U.S., until now. Now, we have a lawyer who, as president, uses the NSA to give him advance warning of what his office visitors are about to ask him. And now we have lawyers for the federal government who work for the president and can know of their adversaries' most intimate client communications.

This is profoundly unfair, as it gives one side a microscope on the plans of the other. It is unwise, too, as clients will be reluctant to open up to counsel when they know that the NSA could spill the beans to the other side. In the adversarial context, for the system to work fairly and effectively, it is vital that clients be free to speak with their lawyers without the slightest fear of government intrusion, particularly when the government is on the other side of the deal or the case.

If you have spoken to a lawyer recently and if that lawyer is dealing with the federal government on your behalf, you can thank the constitutional scholar in the Oval Office for destroying the formerly privileged nature of your conversations.

But that is not the only legal protection that President Obama has destroyed. In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in a case in which journalists in the pre-Snowden era challenged the government's spying on them. The government won the case largely because it persuaded the court that the journalists did not have standing to bring the lawsuit because, the court ruled, their fears of being spied upon were only hypothetical: They suspected that their communications with their sources were being monitored, but they couldn't prove it. In this post-Snowden era, we now know that the journalists in that case were being spied upon.


Nevertheless, during the oral argument in that case, government lawyers told the high court that should government prosecutors acquire from the NSA evidence of criminal behavior against anyone whom they eventually would prosecute and should they wish to use that evidence in the prosecution, the Justice Department would inform defense counsel of the true source of the evidence so that the defendant would have the ability to challenge the evidence.

Yet, last week, in a case in federal court in Oregon, the same Justice Department that told the highest court in the land last year that it would dutifully and truthfully reveal its sources of evidence — as case law requires and even when the source is an NSA wiretap — told a federal district court judge that it had no need or intention of doing so. If this practice of using NSA wiretaps as the original source of evidence in criminal cases and keeping that information from the defendants against whom it is used is permitted, we will have yet another loss of liberty.

Federal law requires that criminal prosecutions be commenced after articulable suspicion about the crime and the defendant. Prosecutions cannot be commenced by roving through intelligence data obtained through extra-constitutional means. That is the moral equivalent of throwing a dart at a dart board that contains the names of potential defendants and prosecuting the person whose name the dart hits.

For the past 75 years, federal prosecutors have not been permitted to use unlawfully obtained evidence in criminal cases, and they have been required to state truthfully the sources of their evidence so that its lawfulness can be tested. This rule generally has served to keep law enforcement from breaking the laws it has sworn to uphold by denying to its agents the fruits of their own unlawful activity.

Liberty is rarely lost overnight. It is lost slowly and in the name of safety. In the name of keeping us safe, the feds have spied on the lawyers who negotiate with them, lied to the lawyers whose clients they are prosecuting and misrepresented their behavior to the Supreme Court. As far as the public record reveals, they have not corrected that misrepresentation. They have done all of this in utter defiance of well-settled law and procedures and constitutional safeguards.

What will they do next?

Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the Senior Judicial Analyst at Fox News Channel and anchor of "FreedomWatch" on Fox Business Network.



Previously:


02/20/14 An Unconscionable Silence
02/13/14 A New Assault on Freedom of the Press
02/06/14 Executive Order Tyranny
01/30/14 A Sorry State of the Union
01/23/14 Presidential Placebo
01/16/14 Tyranny masquerading as liberty from a clueless 'constitutional expert'
01/09/14 Spying on Congress
12/19/13 Almost Orwellian
12/12/13 A Conspiracy So Vast
12/05/13 The Pope and Basic Economics
11/28/13 What if Thanksgiving Exposes the Government?
11/21/13 The Shutdown and the Rollout
11/14/13 Freedom and Federalism
11/07/13 End Runs Around the Constitution
10/31/13 Spying on the President
010/24/13 A Government of Secrecy and Fear
010/17/13 Debt and Destruction
010/10/13 Before You Rejoice...
010/02/13 Government Looking for Witches Will Find Them
09/26/13 Is the FISA Court Constitutional?
09/19/13 Spying and Lying
09/12/13 The President's Embarrassment
09/05/13 War, War, What is it Good For?
08/08/13 Domestic Spying Is Dangerous to Freedom
08/01/13 Liberty's Backlash
07/25/13 Liberty and Safety
07/18/13 Double Jeopardy
07/11/13 Above the Law
07/04/13 Jefferson Weeping
06/27/13 The Truth Shall Keep Us Free
06/20/13 Fidelity to the Constitution When We Need It
06/1313 Liberty in Shambles
06/06/13 What if Laws Applied to Everyone?
05/30/13 An Assault on Freedom of the Press
05/23/13 Tyranny Around the Corner
05/17/13 Storm Clouds Gathering
05/09/13 Why We Should Mistrust the Government
05/02/13 More Holes in the Fourth Amendment
04/25/13 Boston and Freedom
04/18/13 Taxation Is Theft
04/11/13 Drones, Guns and the President
04/04/13 When the Government Goes Bankrupt
03/28/13 Hope for the Dead
03/21/13 No More Asking for Permission To Speak
03/14/13 What if Nanny Is a Thug?
02/28/13 Obama's False Alarms
02/14/13 Obama's Secret Court for Killing
02/07/13 Obama Gives Himself Permission To Kill
01/31/13 Both sides in immigration debate overlook main issue
01/24/13 Guns and the President
01/17/13 Guns and the Government
01/10/13 Guns and Freedom
12/13/12 Government Spying Out of Control
12/06/12 Republicans for Big Government
11/29/12 Republicans and Taxes
11/15/12 Silencing General Petraeus
11/08/12 Four more years to crush personal freedoms
10/25/12 Silence on Libya
10/18/12 Who Is Responsible for the Mess in Libya?
10/11/12 Let Gary Johnson Debate
10/04/12 Two Failures
09/27/12 The Arab Spring Becomes a Western Winter
08/23/12 Abortion and Rape
08/16/12 November's Choices
08/09/12 Gazillions
07/19/12 The Rule of Law
07/12/12 We Are at a Turning Point
07/03/12 A Vast New Federal Power
06/28/12 Restraining Arizona, Unleashing the President
06/21/12 Can the President Rewrite Federal Law?
06/15/12 Squealing Versus Killing
06/07/12 Where Is The Outrage?
05/31/12 The Secret Kill List
05/24/12 What If We Have Only Memories of Freedom?
05/17/12 Is There a Drone in Your Backyard?
05/10/12 What Constitutes a Fair Trial?
05/03/12 The President's Private War
04/26/12 Rick Perry Was Correct
04/19/12 A Government of Waste
04/12/12 What If the Government Rejects the Constitution?
03/29/12 Can the Government Force You To Eat Broccoli?
03/22/12 Is the CIA in Your Kitchen?
03/15/12 Can the Secret Service Tell You To Shut Up?
03/08/12 Can the President Kill You?
02/23/12 What If Democracy Is Bunk?
02/16/12 Time To Tame the Federal Beast
02/09/12 Do Catholics Have Too Many Babies?
02/02/12 What Is a Just War?
01/25/12 A Few Words About Abortion
01/20/12 How Much Economic Freedom Do We Have in the United States?
01/12/12 What If Elections Don't Matter?
01/05/12 Big Government Cannot Pay Its Bills, Again
12/29/11 The Case for Austerity
12/22/11 New Ideas or Fidelity to Old Principles?
12/15/11 The Government as Lawbreaker, Again
12/08/11 What if our rights didn't come from the Almighty or from our humanity, but from the government?
12/01/11 Can Congress Steal Your Constitutional Freedoms?
11/24/11 What if the Constitution No Longer Applied?
11/17/11 Congress and Secrecy
11/10/11 Does the Government Work for Us, or Do We Work for the Government?
11/03/11 Look at What the Government Has Done with Your Money
10/27/11 What Have the Wars Done for You?
10/20/11 Is Freedom in America a Myth or a Reality?


© 2012, ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS SYNDICATE

Columnists

Toons

Lifestyles

Quantcast