FWIW - SCOTUS will have no bearing on HRC and the Cabal's fate. Their fate has already been determined.
"
Criminal defendants in the Article III judicial system have an automatic right to appeal to federal
courts of appeal and then a right to petition the Supreme Court for final review. In contrast,
defendants in military cases typically may not appeal their cases to the U.S. Supreme Court
unless the highest military court, the CAAF, had also granted discretionary review in the case"
SCOTUS appoints the FISC judges, but there is a FISC appeals court in between, known as the FISCR. I have no idea if SCOTUS actually gets involved in FISC rulings.
The bigger question is, there would have to be grounds for a SCOTUS review. And then there is the appeals process through FISCR. I'm more inclined to believe that there is so much evidence to support illegal spying activities. And that no defense counsel will be able to assemble a reasonable argument in front of a non-corrupt judge as to why an appeal above FISCR to SCOTUS would be needed. I'm pretty sure "they have it all".
FISCR reviews denials, right? But the more apt point, would be or perhaps should be, approved FISA activities. Not sure is FISCR has oversight of approved FISAs though - do you know?
Not to my knowledge. I saw some stats the other day (didn't save the link) but under Hussein the number of FISA warrant apps went up significantly with the vast majority of them being approved. And a very high percentage, of the very few denials, were sent back to "build a better case". And it was a very low percentage of those which were approved upon appeal. (Now I'm kicking myself for not saving that infographic). I recall average warrant applications being in the high 400s per year. They have dropped significantly under Trump. And more denials.
Hm, I had it in my head that FISCR only review previous FISC decisions that were denied (but not the ones that were approved) - can't seem to find a link for that though. Too many dustbunnies in my old geezer skull, p'haps.
I guess that makes sense - FISA warrants that are approved, could only be theoretically appealed by the same govt agency that applied for the warrant in the first place, and why would they appeal an approved one? Hence, FISCR only sees reviews for denied or modified warrants.
The FISCR has jurisdiction to review the denial of any application under FISA by the FISC. The FISCRβs review of the FISCβs denial of an application for surveillance is limited. After a "motion of the United States" to transmit the FISCβs record, the FISCR may either affirm or reverse the FISC judge's decision. If the FISCR determines that the application was properly denied, it must "provide for the record a written statement of each reason for its decision." Under the USA Freedom Act, the FISC is required to certify for review by the FISCR questions of law in the orders it has issued that affect the βneed for uniformityβ or where consideration βwould serve the interests of justice.β In response, the FISCR may give binding instructions to the FISC or require the FISC send the complete record to the FISCR for it to decide the entire matter itself. Finally, the FISCR can also review the FISCβs decisions on third party challenges to orders under FISA (e.g. an order for an individual to produce tangible things or a connected gag order, and electronic service providers directed to assist the government).
The Supreme Court has statutory jurisdiction to review FISC opinions under certain circumstances. The Court may review on a Writ of Certiorari filed by the United States any decision of the FISCR affirming the denial of a government application to the FISC. Additionally, the FISCR certify βany question of law . . . as to which instructions are desired,β and the Supreme Court may then give binding instructions to the FISCR or require the FISCR send the complete record up and decide the entire matter itself. The Court may also review FISCR decisions on a third party challenges. In reviewing a FISCR decision, the Supreme Court βmayβ appoint one of the designated amicus curiae or another individual to provide briefing or other assistance.
They review any and all decisions made by the FISC as best as I can tell. The court was only created in 1978 and due to "minimization procedures" aka classify the fuck outta everything there isn't a lot of precedent to go on. That, and it's all classified.
If you want to know more, dig into the guts of EO12333.
view the rest of the comments β
AlienEskimo ago
Hillary must be terrified of what will happen to her once Trump's SC pick takes his seat on the bench
Blacksmith21 ago
FWIW - SCOTUS will have no bearing on HRC and the Cabal's fate. Their fate has already been determined.
" Criminal defendants in the Article III judicial system have an automatic right to appeal to federal courts of appeal and then a right to petition the Supreme Court for final review. In contrast, defendants in military cases typically may not appeal their cases to the U.S. Supreme Court unless the highest military court, the CAAF, had also granted discretionary review in the case"
AlienEskimo ago
Do you think SC oversight of FISC/FISA activities will play no role in this?
Blacksmith21 ago
SCOTUS appoints the FISC judges, but there is a FISC appeals court in between, known as the FISCR. I have no idea if SCOTUS actually gets involved in FISC rulings.
The bigger question is, there would have to be grounds for a SCOTUS review. And then there is the appeals process through FISCR. I'm more inclined to believe that there is so much evidence to support illegal spying activities. And that no defense counsel will be able to assemble a reasonable argument in front of a non-corrupt judge as to why an appeal above FISCR to SCOTUS would be needed. I'm pretty sure "they have it all".
AlienEskimo ago
FISCR reviews denials, right? But the more apt point, would be or perhaps should be, approved FISA activities. Not sure is FISCR has oversight of approved FISAs though - do you know?
Blacksmith21 ago
Not to my knowledge. I saw some stats the other day (didn't save the link) but under Hussein the number of FISA warrant apps went up significantly with the vast majority of them being approved. And a very high percentage, of the very few denials, were sent back to "build a better case". And it was a very low percentage of those which were approved upon appeal. (Now I'm kicking myself for not saving that infographic). I recall average warrant applications being in the high 400s per year. They have dropped significantly under Trump. And more denials.
FISCR reviews previous FISC decisions: http://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/public-filings
Now I have to read the one with JW to see what that's about.
AlienEskimo ago
Hm, I had it in my head that FISCR only review previous FISC decisions that were denied (but not the ones that were approved) - can't seem to find a link for that though. Too many dustbunnies in my old geezer skull, p'haps.
Edit: hmmm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court_of_Review
I guess that makes sense - FISA warrants that are approved, could only be theoretically appealed by the same govt agency that applied for the warrant in the first place, and why would they appeal an approved one? Hence, FISCR only sees reviews for denied or modified warrants.
Blacksmith21 ago
P11 too. PDF warning: http://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/FISC%20Misc%2018-03%20Judicial%20Watch%20Inc%27s%20Motion%20For%20Publication%20of%20Transcripts%20180725_2.pdf
AlienEskimo ago
Hmmm, so the first appeal to FISCR occurred in 2002 (although the FISA court was established in 1978): https://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/fiscr111802.html
Blacksmith21 ago
Read down a little bit. Table showing # of warrants per year. Interesting numbers, though not sure if I can conclude anything concrete from it:
These guys do great work like Judicial Watch: https://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/fisa/stats/default.html
AlienEskimo ago
I hadn't even heard of them before today, reading your replies led me to do some extra digging
Blacksmith21 ago
Tom Fitton should have his face carved alongside Flynn, Trump and Rogers at the next Mt. Rushmore.
And I live in the Swamp ; )
AlienEskimo ago
Thanks
Blacksmith21 ago
If you're tracking, check this: https://www.theepochtimes.com/surveillance-court-held-no-hearing-on-carter-page-spy-warrant_2639478.html
AlienEskimo ago
Hm, read that... also found this:
https://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/fisa/fisc/
Blacksmith21 ago
FISCR is the appeals court and "IG" for FISC. I think that's the simplest definition.
Blacksmith21 ago
They review any and all decisions made by the FISC as best as I can tell. The court was only created in 1978 and due to "minimization procedures" aka classify the fuck outta everything there isn't a lot of precedent to go on. That, and it's all classified.
If you want to know more, dig into the guts of EO12333.