UNITED STATES FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE COURT - MEMORANDUM OPINION

Cryptome / Washington Post ^ | MAY 17 2002 | ROYCE C. LAMBERTH

[Lockbox]

In September 2000, the government came forward to confess error in some 75 FISA applications related to major terrorist attacks directed agaiinst the United States. The errors related to misstatements and omissions of material facts.

FISA judges have rarely discussed their work, but in recent years U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth, the FISA court's presiding judge, has been offering his opinions on that body's operations. A former prosecutor with a reputation for toughness and independence, Judge Lamberth was appointed to the federal district court by President Ronald Reagan and to the FISA court by Rhenquist.

[tet68]

74 out of 75 isn't too bad, eh Janet?

[APBaer]

"75 FISA applications...misstatements and omissions of material facts."

So, your honor, why aren't they in jail for contempt of Court. Wake up and smell the coffee, Royce, they lie.
And even when you catch them, like in the Bureau of Indian Affairs Trust fund case, you don't do sheet about it, so they are hardly discouraged.

[mrsmith]

Thanks for the link to the ruling. Whew! I'm glad this was written by Lamberth and not some of those muddleheaded Clinton zombies!

Well, my 2 cents: DOJ has submitted new "wall" rules reflecting the changes in the law since 9/11 to replace the special temporary "wall" procedures (that some have faulted for the failure of the pre 9-11 Moussoui investigation) which were imposed by the court only because of Reno's abuse of the system.

Although generally satisfied that the new "wall" rules are good and address the abuses of the Reno era, according to the estimable judge Lamberth one of the new rules was flawed because it allowed, or did not prevent, FISA cases being "directed" by criminal prosecutors instead of intelligence agents when a target is both a suspected criminal and suspected foreign agent.

The judge sounds reasonable to me. IMO the purpose of allowing FISA when a significant instead of only purpose of an investigation is foreign intelligence was only to allow more cases to be investigated that way - not to change the way the FISA investigation was done or the info handled.
("Wall": procedures "to preserve both the appearance and the fact that FISA surveillances and searches were not being used sub rosa for criminal investigations, " )

Of course it would be nice to read Justice's side of the argument.