The perils of partiality
Former Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach turns Martin Luther King Day into an occasion for scoring a political point against President Bush: "The perils of unchecked power." Katzenbach compares the FBI's warrantless wiretapping of Martin Luther King during the Johnson administration -- wiretapping Katzenbach advised Robert Kennedy to approve -- to President Bush's authorization of surveillance of al Qaeda communications:
Today we are again engaged in a debate over wiretapping for reasons of national security — the same kind of justification Hoover offered when he wanted to spy on King. The problem, then as now, is not the invasion of privacy, although that can be a difficulty. But it fades in significance to the claim of unfettered authority in the name of "national security." There may be good and sufficient reasons for invasions of privacy. But those reasons cannot and should not be kept secret by those charged with enforcing the law. No one should have such power, and in our constitutional system of checks and balances, no one legitimately does.Well, thanks, but there are a few facts that suggest a distinction between wiretapping Martin Luther King and the interception of al Qaeda communications. One might think that Katzenbach would find the former less justifiable than the latter, but Katzenbach manages both to justify himself and impugn President Bush.Forcing the executive to explain its reasons for intrusive law enforcement is essential to maintaining not just privacy but freedom itself. A congressional committee must exercise oversight. So too must an independent court because Congress is also subject to possible political pressure.
Our freedom is too precious, and too much blood has been shed to preserve it, to entrust it to a single person, however sincere and however well intentioned.
Reasonable people less concerned with scoring politcal points would more likely conclude that Katzenbach has things backwards. Reasonable people, for example, understand the distinction between law enforcement and war. One might also think that a former Attorney General of the United States would understand this distinction, but one would apparently be wrong.
Katzenbach implies that the administration "kept secret" the reasons for the NSA surveillance program. The administration, however, briefed congressional leadership. Although he doesn't acknowledge the administration's briefing of congressional authorities, Katzenbach also implies that the administration's briefing was inadequate. Katzenbach implies that the reasons for the NSA surveillance program must also be explained to congressional committees and judicial authorities.
I look forward to future installments of Katzenbach's meditations. Coming soon: Why Roosevelt should have disclosed to Congress and the courts that the United States had broken the Japanese codes during World War II, followed by why Churchill should have announced that the British had broken the Germans' Enigma code. (Courtesy of RealClearPolitics.)
