> The claim to supercede the attorney-client privilege is based on the
> Foreign Surveillance Act ("FISA") of 1978, a police state piece of
> legislation of the Carter Administration.
Ironically, it seems that FISA was born in reaction to the widespread illegal police-state survelliance practices unearthed by the Church Committee. It looks like Congress got rid of these illegal practices by making them legal -- so long as foreign powers (very broadly defined) could be shown to be somehow involved.
> A good analysis of FISA (written shortly before it was yet further
> broadened) is available at
> <http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism/fisa_faq.html>
This is a very clear summary, but I don't see any mention of allowing the covert surveillance of attorney-client communications. Can you think of another summary that makes the connection clear? Or is this just SOP in prisons? I was under the impression it was relatively new frontier in privacy violation, or at least that legitimating it was.
> The surveillance in violation of the attorney-clent privilege was
> initiated not only before the Patriot Act was passed, but by the prior
> administration. The police state is bipartisan.
Interestingly, the EFF summary includes the development of FISA over time, and lists several bills which extended its scope, but never mentions Clinton's 1996 Anti-Terrorism Bill. Could it be possible that that is where the extension to permit surveillance and use of attorney-client communications was explicitly made?
Michael