Suits claim Bush broke spying laws

WASHINGTON – Two civil liberties groups filed separate lawsuits Tuesday to halt the Bush administration’s domestic spying program, charging that the interception of Americans’ communications without court warrants is illegal and unconstitutional.

The federal court lawsuits brought by the American Civil Liberties Union in Detroit and the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York are the latest and most prominent legal challenges to the spying program, which is run by the super-secret National Security Agency.

The groups argued that President Bush exceeded his power, violated the rights of American citizens and broke eavesdropping laws when he authorized the program after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to track members and supporters of al-Qaida in the United States.

The program “seriously compromised the free speech and privacy rights of the plaintiffs and others,” argued the ACLU lawsuit.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan reiterated the administration’s contention that Bush acted legally, asserting that the program was “a vital tool in our efforts to prevent further attacks inside the United States.”

“If you’re not talking to a known al-Qaida member or a member of an affiliated organization, you don’t have to worry about this,” said McClellan.

The program was revealed by the New York Times last month, and congressional hearings into its legality are scheduled for next month.

The CCR lawsuit named Bush, the heads of the NSA and other intelligence agencies, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff as defendants.

The ACLU lawsuit was filed against the NSA and its director, Lt. Gen. Keith B. Alexander.

Both lawsuits sought court orders to stop the program. The CCR lawsuit also demanded that the government disclose “all unlawful surveillance of plaintiffs’ communications.”

The lawsuits were filed on behalf of 18 organizations, lawyers, scholars and journalists who believe their communications with terrorism suspects and their families, witnesses, officials, political activists, human rights observers and others in the Middle East and Asia have been monitored.

“It would be naive for our clients … to assume that their calls and e-mails are not being intercepted,” said Ann Beeson, the lead attorney in the ACLU’s case.

She acknowledged that she had no “direct evidence” her clients were monitored.

Several legal scholars said the Justice Department probably would demand the cases be dismissed because the suits are based on suspicions – not proof – that the plaintiffs have been targeted.

In order for such cases to have standing in court, judges require plaintiffs to show that their rights were infringed by the government’s conduct, something that will be difficult to demonstrate with the NSA program because it’s top secret.

Beeson contended that lawyers representing detainees in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, can no longer communicate freely and in confidence with their clients, their families and friends or witnesses, and must undertake overseas travel to pursue their cases.

The CCR made a similar assertion in its lawsuit.

The NSA program, it charged, has inhibited the ability of four CCR attorneys and a legal aide to adequately represent hundreds of Muslim foreigners held in the United States after Sept. 11, Guantanamo Bay detainees and a Canadian arrested in New York and sent to Syria, where he was held for nearly a year and allegedly tortured.

“Plaintiffs are suffering irreparable harm,” asserted the lawsuit.

Both lawsuits argued that a 1967 law and the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act require the NSA to obtain warrants from a secret federal court to eavesdrop on Americans’ e-mail and telephones.

The administration has acknowledged that the NSA hasn’t obtained FISA warrants, but it argues that Bush was empowered to circumvent FISA by an October 2001 congressional resolution authorizing him to use force to deter al-Qaida attacks.

It also contends that the program targets only a small number of Americans known to belong to or support al-Qaida or other terrorist groups and is structured to protect civil liberties.