Hacker News Reader

Comment by nohuck13 | Hacker News Reader

"The idea that in order to reach the judicial branch, I must ask the executive branch to process my request is antithetical to the separation of powers required by our constitution."

Well that pretty much sums it up.

View on HN

Agreed. It's worth noting that the the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is different than the usual "Article III" courts in that it is created by federal statute. Though its judges are drawn from the judicial branch, it is essentially captive to the executive and legislative branches and its judges have limited terms rather than life tenure. See http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1803

Whoa. That is frightening. Limited terms only? Let me guess, the current administration gets to choose whatever judges they want to preside over the FISC rulings made during their tenure.

They get appointed by the Chief Justice, not the administration.

This isn't correct. All federal courts except for the US Supreme Court are created by statute. The FISC judges are Article III judges on the district courts or courts of appeal, appointed for life. It is true they are assigned to the FISC for limited terms, but they are still article III judges serving in an article III court.

The U.S. Sentencing Commission consists of Article III judges but although it is a judicial agency it is not an Article III court. The presence of Article III judges does not an Article III court make.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com