While browsing my email earlier, I was surprised to find 2 news alerts, right after the other in the webmail listing, from CNet and CNN, regarding this story. U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor out of Detroit, who is hearing the ACLU's complaint over the wiretapping that US President George W. Bush ordered the NSA to perform and which AT&T complied with, has ordered said wiretapping stopped. At this point the DoJ hasn't filed an appeal, but according to the CNet article they have advised the ACLU of their intent to file for a stay of the order while they appeal the ruling. I will not pretend this is a clear and obvious decisionon the matter, but it is a good sign.
CNet points out there are a number of other cases on the matter, several of which have been decided in the favor of the DoJ, but this single ruling by a judge shows to me at least that the US Judiciary does, it seems, have some brains. Of course the variety of the other opinions given on the subject in the other cases also shows why the current US 'Justice' system is a wholly flawed one. How two judges can so grievously differ in their opinions baffles me, to be honest, and I can only hope that this single case is the one which is allowed to be the precedence. I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that the US Constitution, this Judge's reason for her ruling, seems to say you in the US have the right to free speech and privacy, neither of which are aided by the NSA wiretapping. Just my 2cp on the matter.
Judge could alter war on terror
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060807/NEWS05/608070381/1001/NEWS
Geek,
The above article will give you some idea of what created the judge's reasoning.
It's highly unlikely her political ruling will stand. This is a Supreme Court case where we all know there is no politics.
I would respectfully disagree, Joseph, I think that she made the ruling based on law, not politics, though I agree it will undoutedly go to the highest court of the land, who have shown themselves before to be Bush fans.