Mnet :: GOVERNMENT & LAW: Domestic Surveillance

The Bush administration has confirmed a secret domestic surveillance program instituted after Sept. 11, and Democrats and Republicans alike are questioning whether the president had the legal authority to approve the program. Following are experts who can discuss the legal, political and ethical implications of domestic surveillance programs in the U.S.:

1. ROBERT LEVY, senior fellow in constitutional studies at the CATO INSTITUTE: "The president's executive order, which sanctions warrantless wiretaps by the NSA, is reportedly based on legal opinions stating that the president's authority derives from his commander-in-chief power and the post- 911 congressional authorization for the use of military force against Al Qaeda. That rationale, carried to its logical extreme, renders the Patriot Act unnecessary and trumps any dispute over its reauthorization. Indeed, such a policy makes a mockery of the principle of separation of powers. Congress, not the president, is charged with establishing the rules that apply in extraordinary circumstances. The executive branch cannot unilaterally set the rules and enforce the rules, then eliminate court review of possible civil liberties violations." News Contact: Evans Pierre, pr@cato.org Phone: +1-202-789-5200 (12/22/05)

2. DAVID CARTER, professor and director of the intelligence program at MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY's School of Criminal Justice: "When talking about collecting information for national security or homeland security, different guidelines apply based upon agency, intent (whether it's a perceived imminent threat or a long-range threat) and the authority by which the information is gathered. If there is a perceived imminent threat, then there needs to be an ethical weighing about what's appropriate to protect the community. Of course, wholesale use of eavesdropping by the NSA is not permitted. Bottom line: When considering the issues around domestic surveillance, it's a continuum -- there are not bright-line demarcations between what's right and what's wrong." News Contact: Geoff Koch, kochg@msu.edu Phone: +1-517-432-0924 (12/22/05)

3. HAROLD J. KRENT, dean and professor at the CHICAGO-KENT COLLEGE OF LAW: "Congress has carefully delimited the president's authority to undertake surveillance domestically under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Those restrictions are modest, but nonetheless ensure oversight by Article III judges. The recent reports of domestic surveillance fly in the face of those restrictions. Thus, the warrantless wiretaps not only likely violate the Fourth Amendment, but undercut congressional policymaking as well." Krent, the author of "Presidential Powers," was part of the IIT team that examined the FBI's e-mail surveillance system formerly known as Carnivore. News Contact: Gwendolyn E. Osborne, gosborne@kentlaw.edu Phone: +1-312-906- 5251 (12/22/05)

4. MICHAEL VATIS, Internet security expert at STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP, was an FBI Internet chief and deputy director of Executive Office for National Security at the Department of Justice: "I'm doubtful the Supreme Court would read the statute to authorize surveillance of U.S. persons here in the U.S. A case challenging the authority may never reach the Supreme Court because the program is so secret, and unlikely that administration will use evidence gathered from this in a criminal prosecution. The issue is whether Congress will take steps to defend its own constitutional prerogatives by cutting off funding for any such program or passing articles of impeachment over the president's violation of FISA." News Contact: Susan Peters, susan@newspros.com Phone: +1-212-645-4219 (12/22/05)

ROUND-UP: CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING

The Supreme Court said it would consider a constitutional challenge to a 2003 Texas congressional map engineered by Rep. Tom Delay that helped Republicans gain seats in Congress. The legal battle is over the unusual timing of the Texas redistricting, among other things. Under the Constitution, states must adjust their congressional district lines every 10 years to account for population shifts. But in Texas, the boundaries were redrawn twice after the 2000 census, first by a court, then by state lawmakers in a second round promoted by DeLay. Following are experts who can comment on congressional redistricting and political gerrymandering:

1. MICHAEL KANG, assistant professor of law at EMORY UNIVERSITY: "Any consideration of political redistricting must assume that it will be driven by partisan motivations, unless courts are willing to take the drastic step of prohibiting political actors from participating in the process at all. The remaining question, then, is whether judicial decisions that constrain the discretion of partisan actors involved in redistricting will channel their strategic activity in positive directions rather than worse ones." Kang's specialties include election law and business associations, political parties, gerrymandering and campaign finance reform. News Contact: Elaine Justice, ejustic@emory.edu Phone: +1-404-727-0643 (12/22/05)

2. BRUCE E. ALTSCHULER, professor and chair of political science at SUNY OSWEGO: "The Supreme Court has said that, in rare cases, gerrymandering can violate the Constitution but, because it is difficult to set manageable standards, they have never found a violation. This high bar makes it unlikely the challengers will succeed on this ground, but two others may present better chances. One is that by breaking up a district with a Hispanic majority, the Texas legislature violated the Voting Rights Act. Since the Justice Department rejected a staff report agreeing with this contention, the plaintiffs have some chance of success. A second says mid-decade redistricting should account for population shifts, rather than the 2000 census." News Contact: Tim Nekritz, nekritz@oswego.edu Phone: +1-315-312-2265 (12/22/05)

3. BERNARD GROFMAN, professor of political science and social psychology at the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE, is an expert on American politics and the U.S. electoral system, and an international expert on constitutional design. A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a past president of the Public Choice Society, Grofman's work on redistricting and voting rights has often been cited by the U.S. Supreme Court. He has served as a court-appointed consultant in legislative and congressional redistricting lawsuits in 12 states, including landmark cases involving the Voting Rights Act of 1965. These cases often required Grofman to search for patterns of racial polarization in candidate choice. News Contact: Christine Byrd, cbyrd@uci.edu Phone: +1-949-824-9055 (12/22/05)

LEADS

1. ECONOMY: STATE, NATIONAL ECONOMIES TO SLOW ONLY SLIGHTLY IN 2006. PATRICK BARKEY director of economic and policy studies at BALL STATE UNIVERSITY: "The national economy will continue to grow next year, but at a slower rate than 2005, with mild increases in inflation and interest rates. There is plenty of good news about the nation's economy, since it has been surprisingly robust during the last half of the year." News Contact: Layne Cameron, lscameron@bsu.edu Phone: +1-765-285-5953 (12/22/05)

2. POLICY: RESEARCH SHOWS SLOW PROGRESS IN TRANSPORTATION EQUITY. THOMAS W. SANCHEZ, associate professor of urban affairs and planning at the Metropolitan Institute at VIRGINIA TECH and author of the scholarly article "Transportation Equity: Past, Present, and Future," can discuss issues related to public transit, including the NYC transit strike and the 50th anniversary of the Montgomery Bus Boycott: "Progress that has been made in the past 50 years on transportation and civil rights has been slow. There are still many challenges but, many times, issues related to race and class escape public attention until something like Hurricane Katrina brings them to the surface." Sanchez's research on the topic of transportation equity points to a recurrent problem: decision-making bodies that do not really represent the best interests of their constituencies. "The recently passed Transportation Bill (SAFETEA-LU) is making research money available, specifically to look at civil rights and equity concerns. This research could help to examine planning processes that allow such inequality to persist and what can be done to effectively change the process to reach more equity in transportation." News Contact: Susan Trulove, strulove@vt.edu Phone: +1-540- 231-5646 (12/22/05)

3. TERRORISM: IS THE TIMING RIGHT FOR AL QAEDA'S NEXT BIG ONE? MARK ENSALACO, director of the international studies program at the UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON: "The facts that we haven't heard from Osama bin Laden in a year, the United States hasn't been attacked in four years and coalition forces prohibited any major attacks during the recent Iraqi elections concern me. We probably should be on high alert between Christmas and New Year's Day. Having no major attacks during the Iraqi elections is a major victory for the coalition and shifts political momentum to it. Plus, al-Zawahiri said in an e-mail to al-Zarqawi that al-Libbi's arrest is a setback to al Qaeda. So, al Qaeda may be desperate to get back some credibility with a large attack." Ensalaco, who teaches Political Science 452, also known as the "terrorism course," is currently working on book entitled "From Black September to September 11," believed to be the first complete history of Middle East terrorism from 1968 to September 2001. He has been sought out for quotes by Associated Press, Reuters, United Press International, the BBC and CNN. News Contact: Shawn Robinson, srobinson@udayton.edu Phone: +1-937-229-3391 (12/22/05)

PROFNET is an exclusive service of PR Newswire.

To submit query by e-mail: profnetquery@prnewswire.com

To consult the ProfNet Database: http://www.prnewswire.com/profnet

To submit query by fax: 631-348-7906

To submit query by phone: +1-800-PROFNET

To share a thought on the ProfNet Wire: leads@prnewswire.com SOURCE ProfNet

Posted to: