Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
I think our point is that the 'lists' and overall way the US government operates is done in such a way where due process is basically an after thought.
We are talking about the same government that sanctions hit lists that often include American citizens, operates Gitmo, and has basically shredded the constitution when it created the Patriot Act.
Oh, and lets not forget the NSA, and the blatant invasion of privacy that they carry out on a daily basis. With the 'blessing' of the FISA court that deals with the no fly lists as well.
Sorry, but I just have a hard time believing that everyone on that list has been thoroughly vetted.
|
All great points about the weakness of, and bad things the government has done, but how is that relevant to the question asked? Where is the restricted list unconstitutional? The reason you end up on a restriction list is because of intelligence gathered from some of the programs listed. Right or wrong, that is how you end up on the list.
You can try and argue the constitutionality of these programs, but the constitution says nothing about the collection of information about citizens or restrictions to controlled substances and places. So far the Supreme Court has not said anything to support the unconstitutional claims. While I think this is complete bunk, and the NSA is infringing upon our freedoms, they do so in ways that is not controlled under the auspices of the constitution or federal law. Saying that, using that information for public good is a positive outcome from a bad situation. Unless someone can successfully argue in front of the Supreme Court that these restrictions are unconstitutional they are going to be considered kosher under the constitution. I think the reason this argument has not been made is because you have to prove the law under which these programs are rendered is wrong and does not comply with the intent of the constitution. Remember, the constitution does not provide or frame law but is the framework from which law is established. The laws define what and what not is legal, not the constitution.