Many have written of the acts and potential
fate of Edward Snowden for disclosing classified information regarding the
government sponsored invasion of privacy.
While that is interesting, and worthy of intense debate, it is well
covered by others. What I feel is not
being covered are the acts and fate of the other players in this drama – the
ones who may have broken their oaths to the Constitution to implement the
programs Mr. Snowden felt obliged to expose.
The purpose of this column is to create a starting point for that
discussion.
As far as I can
tell, all members of the government from the President to the Congress to the
Judiciary to the lowliest Civil Servant takes an Oath to protect and preserve
the Constitution of the United States.
In fact, the Presidential Oath says nothing except to protect the
Constitution.
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully
execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of
my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Oath of
Office for the President
The Constitution is
the highest law of our land. It cannot
be changed except by Amendment, though through the years Judicial decisions
have weakened and changed the meaning of several parts via fiat, with the
(mostly passive) support of the Legislative and Executive branches. Given that a (the?) main purpose of the
Constitution is to protect the Citizens from the Government, it makes sense
that the government organs would follow this path. To date, a vast majority of the Citizenry
seems to either not have noticed, or not cared enough to complain. It is interesting that the current events in
Egypt reflect their populace caring enough to act as the freely elected
Islamists infringed on their constitution.
The programs exposed
by Mr. Snowden clearly are unconstitutional per the 4th Amendment. That is, the actions of the government are clearly
illegal.
Amendment
IV
The
right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no
Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized.
The question at hand
is how to correct this illegality (since the programs continue), and what are
the penalties for those who broke the law.
Also, identification of WHO should be held responsible is not always
clear.
It would be easy to
point a finger at the National Security Agency, or other intelligence agencies,
and feel the culprit has been found. But
in my view the responsibility is with those in charge who ordered or sponsored
the activity more so than those who implemented it.
Though we really
don’t know, I suspect the program originated in the Executive Branch, somewhere
in the National Security Apparatus. So
the first person with responsibility is not the person who “thought” of the
idea (as many ideas both good and bad are brought forth), but the person who
“approved” the implementation. The
President(s) in place, as the leader of the Executive branch and ultimate
approver during this activity, should be held accountable, as well as their
staff who assisted in circumventing the Constitution -such as their Legal Counsel. How far it goes should be decided by Grand
Jury or Impeachment proceeding.
Impeachment may be
difficult as the Legislative branch leadership is also culpable. It is acknowledged by their pubic
pronouncements that both the Majority and Minority leadership of both the House
and Senate were briefed and continue to support the activity. As are the majority of members in the House
and Senate Select Intelligence committees who necessarily approved the program. The only legislators that could ethically sit
in judgment would be those who were themselves not tainted by the approval process
of this activity.
I am also curious as
to what kind of Federal Judge would find a compelling argument to approve the
vast and ubiquitous invasion of privacy without a probable cause. We can safely assume that the judges chosen
for the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court are not chosen
for their vigorous defense of personal freedom or individual liberty! But it takes a special level of hubris or
incompetence to blatantly disregard such a fundamental freedom. This is the person (after the President) who
holds the highest level of responsibility and deserves the strictest punishment
for failing the constitution.
Since I know the
Politicians involved would not do the honorable thing and resign, I believe the
only way forward would be to begin the process of impeachment of current
officers, and a special prosecutor for those no longer serving. This would be a far reaching and painful
process, but one that is needed to restore the rule of law within the government. A government that has grown contemptuous of
personal liberty. For those that saw the
erosion of our liberty is required to protect us from threats, I need only to
quote perhaps the wisest and most intelligent person to ever live in this land,
and one who also lived in a time of great peril…
“They
who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety.”
-
Ben Franklin
No comments:
Post a Comment