The legal/constitutional analyses by the likes of Sunstein et al have more weight.

I cannot imagine, for instance, the SCOTUS citing this report (or ones like it - commissioned by the Congress); whereas I can imagine the SCOTUS citing case law.

The case law seems very clear to me: SCOTUS and FISCR and federal; district courts have all held that the POTUS has the power to order searches and seizures of US citizens in some instances.

This controversy will come down to whether this instance is so coverd by the law.

And as you point out, this may invilve technical details - such as from WHERE were the electornic communications intercepted, HOW they were intercepted.

I believe that anyone communicating with an al Qaeda suspect (or their affiliates) is a foreign agent who: (1) has no REASONABLE expectation for privacy; (2) might be communicating intelligence we need to prevent attacks.

If the POTUS/CinC cannot collect this intel - (when it is located within the USA and when the person in the USA is a legal US person) - without a court order, then we do not have a constitutionl which reasonably allows us to defend ourselves.(As Sunstein and other have argued, this intel is a necessary and expected part of war powers.)

The SCOTUS and other courts have consitently held that the CinC can do this to collect FOREIGN intel.

KEY POINT: FISA grew oput of the Nixon era abuses.

Nixon’s targets were NOT foreign but domestic, and many of these were personal/political enemies and not enemies of the nation. Nixon ABUSED a real presidential power; he did not invent one out of whole cloth.

That said, the report is carefully non-committal about the legality of the program but more certain about the probable stupidity of the Justice Department’s AUMF argument for constitutionality. That was a non-starter from the beginning and makes me wonder what was going through the idiot’s minds at DOJ when they made it in the first place.

There are probably better arguments under Article II for the program’s constitutionality as the Powerline guys point out. I’m pretty sure that will be the tack taken by the Administration during the Congressional hearings on the program later this month.

are you pulling our legs this a.m.? Such a well written article I can’t tell if it a joke, it aught to be.