I have no problem with local laws being enforced by the local government. What I have a problem with is the US government ignoring the constitutional rights of a US citizen living over seas.

offroadaz on November 25, 2008 at 1:16 PM

Then petition to have it codified in US law so that US officials have to respect the rights of countrymen regardless of where they are. As it stands you can’t apply US law in a place where the US has no jurisdiction. It’s absurd. And until this happens US citizens have no constitutional rights overseas.

Appellate court upholds warrantless searches abroad
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the convictions of three
terrorists convicted prior to 9/11 of working with al-Qaeda to attack
American interests. The three-judge panel ruled that……

No, it means the US constitution does not extend outside of US territories. Nor should it.

Darth Executor on November 25, 2008 at 11:43 AM

I have no problem with local laws being enforced by the local government. What I have a problem with is the US government ignoring the constitutional rights of a US citizen living over seas.

As an American abroad, you are basically “entitled” to whatever the local government wishes to allow. The US Consulate can provide local legal assistance, but cannot “represent” you. Past the 12-mile limit…you are truly limited.

Somewhat different for US military members, under a SOFA agreement or other understanding with the local government.

1) The extraterritoriality of it all. If the Constitution really does stop at the waters edge then it stops period. I regardless of citizenship would then be subject to rules and punishments of whatever territory I am standing in.

Unless the US has an agreement with that particular country, you already are and should be.

I really disagree with you Ed. This is a horrible decision. The court basically said you rights as an American end when you leave US soil. Our rights as citizens should be with us regardless of where we travel.

offroadaz on November 25, 2008 at 9:42 AM

No, it means the US constitution does not extend outside of US territories. Nor should it.

1) The extraterritoriality of it all. If the Constitution really does stop at the waters edge then it stops period. I regardless of citizenship would then be subject to rules and punishments of whatever territory I am standing in. That same thought process could be applied to tax law as well, which the govt ignores with regularity.

2) Don’t think for one moment that such rulings won’t be applied against us in the future. For the same reason we scream at UN and foreign interventions on our territory, should we not apply the same standards as we apply them to others?

So you are only American when you live in America?

Right. I have no delusions that other nations should be forced to uphold our rights when we are in their countries. But our own government arguing, sucessfully, for the right to ignore the restraints of the Constitution scares me a lot more than the terrorist boogeyman.

I suppose I am a minority, but I’d rather die free and proud.

How weak does a case have to be to not be able to get a warrant? Every judge I’ve known would sign one just to avoid being late for his tee time.

Let’s just trash the whole thing. The search and seizure concessions are a good trade off the the first and second amendments.

A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often….

perroviejo on November 25, 2008 at 10:22 AM

It said the case was pre-9/11, I wonder when the surveillance took place. We wouldn’t want to suffer from BDS when it might be that a former president deserves blame/kudos.

Example: Freedom of Religion.

Go to Saudi Arabia, and open up a Christian book store and within about 10 minutes or maybe less, your store will be burnt down, you will be arrested and incarcerated.

But you still can worship GOD inside your head while you wait to be deported or beheaded or both.

It’s hard to imagine that all twenty seven amendments would apply to all living human beings. Will muslims seek to reinstate the 18th amendment?

Zorro on November 25, 2008 at 10:05 AM

Framers believed that Rights came from God, and this document only enumerated them… given that outlook its pretty clear (because they believed that God made the world) that American Rights did not stop at the waters edge…

But it is a very murky subject… it was once common law that a countrys laws stopped at its borders, but after WWII that changed… now the US Court says it has worldwide jurisdiction… scary… and not all of the fallout from that has been adjudacated yet.

Also: Lemme get it on the record; everyone is focusing on the Fourth Amendment issue here. By which I mean the Times’ article and much of the coverage on the lawblogs hasn’t even mentioned the second part of the opinion. But I think that second issue, a due process question involving secret evidence, will be more important in the long run. Defendants who never get to see the evidence against them? Whoa. Tread carefully, my friend.

Either the Constitution’s reach ends at the waters’ edges, or it reaches everywhere and applies to all living human beings.

It’s hard to imagine that all twenty seven amendments would apply to all living human beings. Will muslims seek to reinstate the 18th amendment?

Our rights as citizens should be with us regardless of where we travel.

offroadaz on November 25, 2008 at 9:42 AM

But…

search was reasonable under the Constitution, given the “self-evident need to investigate threats to national security” that foreign terrorist organizations presented

So do the authorities have to show this “self-evident need” before searching or surveilling? IDK, I tend to agree with Wino that National Security trumps, but Offroad has a point.

I’ve never understood the argument that American citizens should get the same rights if they live abroad. If I’m no longer on U.S. soil I wouldn’t expect to get the same rights as if I were. I think we should be able to wiretap any Americans if they’re overseas.

jonezee on November 25, 2008 at 10:00 AM

So you are only American when you live in America?

Romeo13 on November 25, 2008 at 9:39 AM

I don’t know if it will be overturned. It is outside the scope of US law if overseas. Try telling that to the Supremes…