November election could impact judgeships
Published 12:00 am Wednesday, October 11, 2006
To the Editor:
How would you feel if you had just lost your case in a federal court and discovered that the judge was a trustee and secretary for an organization that gave $45,000 to the people who sued you?
That’s exactly what U. S Federal Judge Anna Diggs Taylor did a few weeks ago to the President’s Terrorist Surveillance Program.
Email newsletter signup
Apparently the ACLU doesn’t like for terrorists and would-be terrorists to have anyone listening to their plans to blow up the next building filled with 3,000 Americans. The ACLU looked around the country, and I mean looked around the country, and found Taylor, a federal judge in Detroit appointed by Democratic President Jimmy Carter who they were confident would rule in their favor.
Lawsuits of this type are never lacking for wannabe plaintiffs, and this case was no exception. The lawsuit was filed, and to no one’s surprise, Taylor ruled that neither the CIA, FBI or NSA could listen to anyone without first obtaining a warrant.
I would like to ask Taylor how much time does the NSA have to obtain a warrant to listen to chatter between 19 terrorists on cell phones only hours before the hijacked planes are taking off? Thankfully, we still have real judges in this country who based their decisions on the law and facts, and not upon the judge’s personal liberal idealogy. Because of the severity of the ruling, it would be customary and proper, even for a liberal judge, to hold up the enforcement of their ACLU decision until an appeals court could hear the case.
But Taylor wasn’t finished.
Last week she refused to stop the enforcement of her order as if she thought her ridiculously liberal decision was going to become law and put the nation at risk of failing to discover the next terrorist attack.
On Oct. 4 2006, the federal appeals court in Cincinnati issued an order stopping the Jimmy Carter appointee and the ACLU from celebrating their confiscation of the terrorist spying program until her decision is reviewed on appeal.
The appeals court ruling was unanimous against her. The case will likely end up in the US Supreme Court, but for Taylor to refuse to hold up the enforcement of her highly questionable order pending an appeal is not only unprecedented, but her refusal reflects the unprofessional bias that should have made her ineligible to participate in this case from the beginning. As a final note, you might not agree with every policy of the current administration, but the appointment of federal judges is the most important decision a President and the US Senate will make that will impact our lives long after the President and Senators have retired. Taylor was appointed by President Jimmy Carter to become a federal judge in 1979, that’s 27 years ago, one year before Carter was defeated and removed from office by President Ronald Reagan. Going to the polls to vote in November has never been more important!