Re: Government shows its hand...good news!

[Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>]

Let me type in that section. But I'm talking about the issue of the
constitutionality of the legislation, of course. National security and
all.

-Declan

On Tue, 9 Sep 1997, Tim May wrote:

> At 5:57 PM -0700 9/9/97, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> >I won't comment on Tim's second possibility, but the amendment added to
> >SAFE today by one committee //prohibits// judicial review. So much for the
> >Supremes likely to strike it down.
> >
> 
> "Prohibits" in what sense, and in what language?
> 
> There's obviously a difference between prohibiting judicial review of
> specific wiretaps and the issue of the constitutionality of the legislation
> itself! I can only surmise you must mean that language has been added
> saying magistrates, etc. are not part of the wiretap process.
> 
> Clearly Congress, by the separation of powers arrangement we have in the
> U.S., cannot say "And, oh by the way, the Supreme Court is not allowed to
> declare this law unconstitutional."
> 
> --Tim May
> 
> There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
> Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
> ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
> Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
> tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
> W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
> Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
> "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>