Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: i_robot73
"Some stalwarts of the People we got there..."

Agreed. The burden of proof should be on the government. The court should have requested the government to identify the safeguards in place to protect citizenry which should include some form of independent monitoring.

4 posted on 02/26/2013 10:05:51 AM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: DannyTN

The burden of proof is (and should be ) on the plaintiffs in our judicial system. But it is disconcerting that we have to wait until the government actually violates rights until the court will entertain arguments on the FISA expansion.


11 posted on 02/26/2013 10:30:02 AM PST by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: DannyTN; i_robot73

They had no standing. This isn’t a victory for big government, plus we’re naive to hope some judge will protect our rights. The burden of proof should be on the government and the American way is via legislation.

Let’s elect the right people. Why aren’t we pulling back to pre-9/11 security levels if we’re pulling back out of Iraq and Afghanistan?


19 posted on 02/26/2013 11:16:12 AM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson