The United States government has a virtual parallel government not subject to constitutional safeguards, checks and balances or the separation of powers. The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, for example. That court is located here:
That is also the office of America's top prosecutor, the Attorney General. The judiciary is supposed to be separate from the executive and legislative branches. This is not even physical separation. The courts in America are supposed to hear from both sides in an "adversarial system". Not in this court. They only hear the prosecutor's side. In 1,800 surveillance rulings last year the prosecution's won-lost record was 1,800-0. When General Holder and his deputies want an order authorizing NSA to get domestic phone records, or when they want to get an order to bug a foreign embassy, they just take the elevator to the sixth floor. No line, no waiting.
NSA conducts virtual off-the-shelf foreign policy and "FISC" or "the FISA court," is a virtual parallel Supreme Court with jurisdiction over NSA activities. It's a secret court, not open to the public as is the Supreme Court, its orders not open to challenge by, for example, a public citizen whose phone records have been seized. It has created its own body of law, applicable only to itself and its jurisdiction, that is not restricted by Supreme Court interpretations of, for example, what are and what are not constitutional searches and seizures. Could the Supreme Court hear a challenge to a FISA court ruling. Yes...I think but this parallel Supreme Court has its own parallel really supreme "Court of Review." Has a FISA court order ever been challenged in the Supreme Court? No.
NSA conducts virtual off-the-shelf foreign policy and "FISC" or "the FISA court," is a virtual parallel Supreme Court with jurisdiction over NSA activities. It's a secret court, not open to the public as is the Supreme Court, its orders not open to challenge by, for example, a public citizen whose phone records have been seized. It has created its own body of law, applicable only to itself and its jurisdiction, that is not restricted by Supreme Court interpretations of, for example, what are and what are not constitutional searches and seizures. Could the Supreme Court hear a challenge to a FISA court ruling. Yes...I think but this parallel Supreme Court has its own parallel really supreme "Court of Review." Has a FISA court order ever been challenged in the Supreme Court? No.
