E Pluribus Unum

Richard Posner is is a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit and a senior lecturer in law at the University of Chicago. Today, he wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post that said, in part, that advanced data-mining techniques are a valuable part of our national security infrastructure and also that they are not a threat to civil liberties. He also contends that the existing FISA safeguards are too restricitive and should be eased (although he doesn't address the issue of independent review, i.e., warrants).

It's an informed (and informative) viewpoint which raises this question: if FISA is, in fact, "too restrictive" doesn't that mean that Bush really did break the law by going around it? Marty Lederman puts it this way:

. . . Posner may be right that current law is too restrictive. Congress should have that debate. But isn't it troubling that an esteemed federal judge seems so indifferent to the fact that, in the meantime -- before the Nation and the Congress have had the opportunity to debate Posner's proposal -- the Nation's Chief Executive is systematically authorizing criminal felonies?

No man is above the law--not terrorists, not leakers, not the President.

(HT to Armando)