What is the FISA Court?The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC, also called the FISA Court) is a U.S. federal court established and authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). The purpose of the FISC is to oversee requests by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies for surveillance warrants against foreign spies inside the United States. Such requests are made most often by the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Congress created FISA and its court as a result of the recommendations by the U.S. Senate's Church Committee. Its powers have evolved to the point that it has been called "almost a parallel Supreme Court." |
|
FISA Court Constitutional Rights' Violations
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS' VIOLATIONS
Procedural Due Process - Fourteenth Amendment
Right to Public Trial - Sixth Amendment
Be Informed of the Nature and Cause of the Accusation - Sixth Amendment
Be confronted with the witnesses against him - Sixth Amendment.
Have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor - Sixth Amendment
Have the Assistance of Counsel for his Defense - Sixth Amendment
POSSIBLE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS' VIOLATIONS
Witness against himself – Fifth Amendment
Cruel and Unusual Punishments Inflicted - Eighth Amendment
Procedural Due Process - Fourteenth Amendment
Right to Public Trial - Sixth Amendment
Be Informed of the Nature and Cause of the Accusation - Sixth Amendment
Be confronted with the witnesses against him - Sixth Amendment.
Have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor - Sixth Amendment
Have the Assistance of Counsel for his Defense - Sixth Amendment
POSSIBLE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS' VIOLATIONS
Witness against himself – Fifth Amendment
Cruel and Unusual Punishments Inflicted - Eighth Amendment
FISA Court
The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC, also called the FISA Court) is a U.S. federal court established and authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). The purpose of the FISC is to oversee requests by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies for surveillance warrants against foreign spies inside the United States .
Such requests are made most often by the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Congress created FISA and its court as a result of the recommendations by the U.S. Senates Church Committee. Its powers have evolved to the point that it has been called "almost a parallel Supreme Court."
After the World Trade Towers were attacked on September 11, 2001, the United States Congress amended FISA with The Patriot Act in 2001. In 2007, despite no known major event, the United States Congress amended FISA with the Protect America Act of 2007, Senate Bill 1927 (110th Congress). FISA was amended to monitor all electronic communications of Americans communicating with foreigners under certain circumstances.
Timeline:
The Supreme Court definition of Privacy: The Right to be Let alone.
On October 23, 2007, Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence Donald MacLean Kerr, Jr just confirmed by the Senate on October 4, 2007 gave a speech to the United States Geo-spatial Intelligence Foundation.
National Intelligence definition of Privacy:
“Privacy, I would offer, is a system of laws, rules, and customs with an infrastructure of Inspectors General, Oversight Committee, and privacy boards on which our intelligence community commitment is based and measured.”
From 1979 to 1985, Kerr served as the fourth director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory.
The United States Constitution, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments afford the rights of the people that when the state or federal government acts in such a way that denies a citizen liberty, the person must be given procedural due process.
This principle by the Constitution requires that the person must first be given notice and the opportunity to be heard. The Constitution states only one command twice. The Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment both say to the federal government that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law."
The United States Supreme Court has held that:
“the basic principle that all people must stand on an equality before the bar of justice in every American court. Today, as in ages past, we are not without tragic proof that the exalted power of some governments to punish manufactured crime dictatorially is the handmaid of tyranny. Under our constitutional system, courts stand against any winds that blow as havens of refuge for those who might otherwise suffer because they are helpless, weak, outnumbered, or because they are nonconforming victims of prejudice and public excitement. Due process of law, preserved for all by our Constitution, commands that no such practice as that disclosed by this record shall send any accused to his death. No higher duty, no more solemn responsibility, rests upon this Court than that of translating into living law and maintaining this constitutional shield deliberately planned and inscribed for the benefit of every human being subject to our Constitution -- of whatever race, creed or persuasion.”
Such requests are made most often by the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Congress created FISA and its court as a result of the recommendations by the U.S. Senates Church Committee. Its powers have evolved to the point that it has been called "almost a parallel Supreme Court."
After the World Trade Towers were attacked on September 11, 2001, the United States Congress amended FISA with The Patriot Act in 2001. In 2007, despite no known major event, the United States Congress amended FISA with the Protect America Act of 2007, Senate Bill 1927 (110th Congress). FISA was amended to monitor all electronic communications of Americans communicating with foreigners under certain circumstances.
Timeline:
- August 5, 2007 United States Congress passes Protect America Act of
2007 - Senate Bill 1927 (110th Congress) Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) Amendments Became Public Law No: 110-55.
Act grants federal agencies additional power to monitor and surveillance domestic individuals with foreign contacts. - October 4, 2007 Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence confirmed by the United States Senate
- Nov. 21, 2007 Jack targeting begun (Realized later had begun at least weeks earlier)
- July 10, 2008
The Supreme Court definition of Privacy: The Right to be Let alone.
On October 23, 2007, Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence Donald MacLean Kerr, Jr just confirmed by the Senate on October 4, 2007 gave a speech to the United States Geo-spatial Intelligence Foundation.
National Intelligence definition of Privacy:
“Privacy, I would offer, is a system of laws, rules, and customs with an infrastructure of Inspectors General, Oversight Committee, and privacy boards on which our intelligence community commitment is based and measured.”
From 1979 to 1985, Kerr served as the fourth director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory.
The United States Constitution, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments afford the rights of the people that when the state or federal government acts in such a way that denies a citizen liberty, the person must be given procedural due process.
This principle by the Constitution requires that the person must first be given notice and the opportunity to be heard. The Constitution states only one command twice. The Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment both say to the federal government that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law."
The United States Supreme Court has held that:
“the basic principle that all people must stand on an equality before the bar of justice in every American court. Today, as in ages past, we are not without tragic proof that the exalted power of some governments to punish manufactured crime dictatorially is the handmaid of tyranny. Under our constitutional system, courts stand against any winds that blow as havens of refuge for those who might otherwise suffer because they are helpless, weak, outnumbered, or because they are nonconforming victims of prejudice and public excitement. Due process of law, preserved for all by our Constitution, commands that no such practice as that disclosed by this record shall send any accused to his death. No higher duty, no more solemn responsibility, rests upon this Court than that of translating into living law and maintaining this constitutional shield deliberately planned and inscribed for the benefit of every human being subject to our Constitution -- of whatever race, creed or persuasion.”
FISA Court
Witness against himself – Fifth Amendment
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that no person shall be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy and no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.
Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court when it held in Miranda v. Arizona that the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination is available in all settings.
The Court has held that the Fifth Amendment's exception from compulsory self-incrimination is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment against abridgement by a state.
The United States and Its Agencies, Corporations, Officers, Employees, and Agents “Perpetrators” inserting, attaching, or by whatever means, a contrivance, device, or any foreign matter into Targeted Person’s body so to extract information to be used against him, against his will, is a violation of the Fifth Amendment, in any setting.
Right to Public Trial - Sixth Amendment
The Sixth Amendment states that In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Be Informed of the Nature and Cause of the Accusation - Sixth Amendment
Targeted Person is not aware and Targeted Person must be aware if Targeted Person’s privacy and liberty is at risk if the government falsely determines government interference or proceedings involving Targeted Person a national secret. There are no reasons advanced to support the secrecy of grand jury proceedings and do not justify secrecy in any legal proceedings. A United States citizen is entitled to a public trial, at least to the extent of having his friends, relatives and counsel present -- no matter with what the government alleges or alleges secrecy.
The failure to afford Targeted Person a reasonable opportunity to be present regarding any government proceedings where Targeted Person’s privacy or liberty is involved is a denial of due process of law. As a minimum, due process requires that an accused be given reasonable notice of the charge against him, the right to examine the witnesses against him, the right to testify in his own behalf, and the right to be represented by counsel.
The Sixth Amendment’s guarantee to a public trial as well as the Sixth Amendment’s right to notice of accusations has been violated. The right to a speedy trial is as fundamental as any of the rights secured by the Sixth Amendment. Targeted Person has a right to be present at any proceedings in any court whether it is Superior Court, District Court, or Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, whereas the decisions affect Targeted Person directly and indirectly. Targeted Person’s privacy is being violated from within his person.
Be confronted with the witnesses against him - Sixth Amendment
Targeted Person was voided the right to confront any witnesses against him at any proceedings, whether at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court or other. To confront and cross-examine witnesses in a compulsory process is a fundamental right. In a 9-0 opinion Justice Antonin Scalia held that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause gives defendants the right to confront witnesses and cross-examine their testimony. This includes testimony police gather.
Have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor - Sixth Amendment
The right under the Sixth Amendment of a citizen in any proceeding effecting his privacy, nerves, and sex organs within his body to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment. Perpetrators have arbitrarily denied Targeted Person the right to have the material testimony for him of a witness concerning events which that witness observed, and thus denied him the right to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor.
Have the Assistance of Counsel for his Defense - Sixth Amendment
The Court has held that the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of counsel is a fundamental right. This would be essential to a fair proceeding, in any court, in which a citizen’s liberty of freedom from body interference is at stake and, as such, the assistance of counsel for his defense is required through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Cruel and Unusual Punishments Inflicted - Eighth Amendment
The United States Constitution, Eighth Amendment states that nor may cruel and unusual punishments may be inflicted. This would apply to a United States citizen in any court proceeding, whether FISA or not.
The Court has upheld execution by public shooting but that is merciful compared to arbitrary and spontaneous administration of remote electronic shock to a person at will day and night. The intent of the Eighth Amendment Clause is to ban arbitrary punishments in a discriminatory or arbitrary manner.
The Eighth Amendment guarantees individuals the right not to be subjected to excessive sanctions. The Eighth Amendment reaffirms the duty of the government to respect the dignity of all persons.
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that no person shall be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy and no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.
Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court when it held in Miranda v. Arizona that the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination is available in all settings.
The Court has held that the Fifth Amendment's exception from compulsory self-incrimination is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment against abridgement by a state.
The United States and Its Agencies, Corporations, Officers, Employees, and Agents “Perpetrators” inserting, attaching, or by whatever means, a contrivance, device, or any foreign matter into Targeted Person’s body so to extract information to be used against him, against his will, is a violation of the Fifth Amendment, in any setting.
Right to Public Trial - Sixth Amendment
The Sixth Amendment states that In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Be Informed of the Nature and Cause of the Accusation - Sixth Amendment
Targeted Person is not aware and Targeted Person must be aware if Targeted Person’s privacy and liberty is at risk if the government falsely determines government interference or proceedings involving Targeted Person a national secret. There are no reasons advanced to support the secrecy of grand jury proceedings and do not justify secrecy in any legal proceedings. A United States citizen is entitled to a public trial, at least to the extent of having his friends, relatives and counsel present -- no matter with what the government alleges or alleges secrecy.
The failure to afford Targeted Person a reasonable opportunity to be present regarding any government proceedings where Targeted Person’s privacy or liberty is involved is a denial of due process of law. As a minimum, due process requires that an accused be given reasonable notice of the charge against him, the right to examine the witnesses against him, the right to testify in his own behalf, and the right to be represented by counsel.
The Sixth Amendment’s guarantee to a public trial as well as the Sixth Amendment’s right to notice of accusations has been violated. The right to a speedy trial is as fundamental as any of the rights secured by the Sixth Amendment. Targeted Person has a right to be present at any proceedings in any court whether it is Superior Court, District Court, or Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, whereas the decisions affect Targeted Person directly and indirectly. Targeted Person’s privacy is being violated from within his person.
Be confronted with the witnesses against him - Sixth Amendment
Targeted Person was voided the right to confront any witnesses against him at any proceedings, whether at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court or other. To confront and cross-examine witnesses in a compulsory process is a fundamental right. In a 9-0 opinion Justice Antonin Scalia held that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause gives defendants the right to confront witnesses and cross-examine their testimony. This includes testimony police gather.
Have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor - Sixth Amendment
The right under the Sixth Amendment of a citizen in any proceeding effecting his privacy, nerves, and sex organs within his body to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment. Perpetrators have arbitrarily denied Targeted Person the right to have the material testimony for him of a witness concerning events which that witness observed, and thus denied him the right to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor.
Have the Assistance of Counsel for his Defense - Sixth Amendment
The Court has held that the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of counsel is a fundamental right. This would be essential to a fair proceeding, in any court, in which a citizen’s liberty of freedom from body interference is at stake and, as such, the assistance of counsel for his defense is required through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Cruel and Unusual Punishments Inflicted - Eighth Amendment
The United States Constitution, Eighth Amendment states that nor may cruel and unusual punishments may be inflicted. This would apply to a United States citizen in any court proceeding, whether FISA or not.
The Court has upheld execution by public shooting but that is merciful compared to arbitrary and spontaneous administration of remote electronic shock to a person at will day and night. The intent of the Eighth Amendment Clause is to ban arbitrary punishments in a discriminatory or arbitrary manner.
The Eighth Amendment guarantees individuals the right not to be subjected to excessive sanctions. The Eighth Amendment reaffirms the duty of the government to respect the dignity of all persons.