So, in the Star Wars movies, the Emporer uses a classic ploy to gain power. First, as Darth Sidious, he arranges a blockade and then attack of the planet Naboo. As Senator Palpatine, he then convinces the ruler of that planet, the naive Queen Amidala, then only 14 years old, to call for a vote of no confidence in the current Supreme Chancellor, Vallorum. With the leader thus deposed, Palpatine plays on the sympathies of the Senate and is elected to the post of Supreme Chancellor.
Then, he secretly orders a clone army that will be unquestioningly loyal to him. As Darth Sidious, through his new apprentice, Count Dooku, Palpatine orchestrates the Separatist Movement. It is the stated goal of the Separatist Movement to secede from the Republic. With a civil war close at hand, Supreme Chancellor Palpatine declares a state of emergency. The witless Jar Jar Binks, manipulated by Palpatine, then calls for a vote to give the Chancellor emergency powers. Palpatine, pretending to be regretful and humble, accepts these powers and vows to give them up as soon as the Separatists are defeated.
Eventually, Palpatine issues Order 66, an order preprogrammed into the clones' minds. They immediately turn on their Jedi generals, slaughtering all but the most cunning of the Jedi. Palpatine announces that the Jedi have attempted to overthrow the Republic, that he has saved the Republic from the Jedi, and that he will continue to do so - but as Emporer, instead of Supreme Chancellor. The Empire has begun, the dark times that Obi-Wan Kenobi told Luke Skywalker about have started.
George Lucas no doubt looked to several historical figures when he wrote about Palpatine's rise to power, most notably Adolf Hitler.
So, what's the point? Merely that in history, as in fiction, leaders will play on the fears of the people in order to increase their own power. It may be the case that the leader's motivation is, initially, a genuine interest in protecting the nation's people. But, as we all know, power corrupts.
The reason for this recitation of Star Wars history is that we find ourselves in a situation that is similar in some ways to the situation Palpatine created - although I do not believe that George W. Bush created terrorists, orchestrated September 11th, or otherwise directly contributed the the state of affairs with which we are now faced. However, several essential elements are there. First, we have an enemy that is ill-defined. Anyone, we are told, could be a terrorist. Second, this threat is being used to justify an extension of the sovereign's power. It is, of course, essential that the enemy may be among us.
One of the most glaring examples of this abuse-of-power-justified-by-a-new-threat is the NSA warrantless wiretapping program. Because of the threat of terrorists, the Bush administration claimed that it had the authority, despite the Constitution, particularly the Fourth Amendment, to evesdrop on private international telephone conversations made by American citizens. The only necessary justification, apparently, was that the telephone calls be made by someone suspected of being a terrorist. Of course, the Bush administration is in charge of deciding who's "suspected of being a terrorist," and doesn't feel particularly obligated to justify that classification to anyone.
To be perfectly blunt, this program was one of the most egregious abuses of power I've ever seen. No matter what threat we are facing, we must hold to the principles of the Constitution. That is essential. The Constitution is the essence of what makes America as great as it is - or has the potential to be. To relegate the Constitution to a set of guidelines to be ignored whenever it becomes inconvenient is to insult each and every American citizen, not to mention our Founding Fathers and centuries of tradition and reverence.
So, I was pleased to hear that a federal judge held that the NSA program is unconstitutional. The goverment has vowed to appeal. I guess we'll see what the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and, potentially, the U.S. Supreme Court have to say. But, while I haven't read the Order, I feel confident that the federal judge has made the right decision and I hope that the higher courts will uphold her decision.
Update: You can read the Order here.
Another Update: As tRJ anticipated in the comments, the decision is now being heavily criticized for being light on legal authority and heavy on rhetoric. You can read an article criticizing the decision here (I found it throught Althouse' blog). Regardless of whether the conclusion or the reasoning are upheld on appeal, however, I stand by my assertion that, morally speaking, this program is inexcusable. Legally, I am of the opinion that the program is a violation of the Constitution at the very least, and probably a violation of several statutes. In any event, it represents an attempt by the Executive to wrest power and authority from the other two branches, which is just not cool.
August 2006
