Scary or Media Hype?

[Werewolf]

Negroponte, testifying before the House Intelligence Committee, said there may be separation of powers issues involved in turning over information to Congress about the program.

At issue is how the secret panel of judges will consider evidence when approving government requests to monitor suspected al-Qaida agents' phone calls and e-mails between the United States and other countries.

Emphasis mine: quoted from:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16687556/

A secret panel of judges. Call me paranoid but stuff like that is really scary or maybe it's just a poor choice of words by the journalist who wrote the article.

Either way...

[cosine]

To me there just seems to be too much "secret this and secret that" going on in the government now days all in the name of theoretical safety from terrorism...

[client32]

Ok, paranoid.

I have a feeling that it might be a little of both scary and a poor choice of words.

It appears to me that when reading about ..... well anything, journalist seem to take a great deal of creative liberty to add any sensationalism that they possibly can.

What bugs me is that stuff like this (I don't know about this in particular) seem to always come from "leaks."  Why the hell even deem something classified if some idiot, that other idiots elected, is going to leak the information.  Seems irresponsible at the least.

[Perd Hapley]

I'd go with poor choice of words.  "Secret panel of judges" means the judges are not identified by name.  This helps to protect classified information, such as which international communications are being monitored. 

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Judges in general scare me.  They aren't elected, they serve life terms, they aren't accountable to the people.  Worse, they routinely re-invent the constitution to serve whatever agenda suits them, and their rulings have the power of law.  More power than law, actually, as laws can be rewritten and repealed by our representatives, whereas judicial rulings cannot.

It's reasonable to be worried about secret judges.

[The Rabbi]

I was waiting for the foil-hat brigade to break out over this one.
This court has existed since 1978.  It doesn't "try" anything and the only decisions it makes involve requests for warrants.

Is there really a secret FISA court?

Yes. FISA established a special court, composed of seven federal district court judges appointed by the Chief Justice for staggered terms and are from different circuits. See 50 U.S.C.A. § 1803. Individual judges of the FISC review the Attorney General's applications for authorization of electronic surveillance aimed at obtaining foreign intelligence information. The proceedings are nonadversarial and are based solely on the DOJ's presentations through its Office of Intelligence Policy and Review.

The records and files of the cases are sealed and may not be revealed even to persons whose prosecutions are based on evidence obtained under FISA warrants, except to a limited degree set by district judges' rulings on motions to suppress. 50 U.S.C. §1803(c). There is no provision for the return of each executed warrant to the FISC, much less with an inventory of items taken, nor for certification that the surveillance was conducted according to the warrant and its "minimization" requirements.

The FISC meets two days monthly, and two of the judges are routinely available in the Washington, D.C. area on other days. Statement of Mary C. Lawton, Counsel for Intelligence Policy, Before the House Subcommittee on Courts, Civil Liberties, and the Administration of Justice, June 8, 1983, at 8.