Professional Documents
Culture Documents
3/5/09
Political Science 202
Annotated Bibliography
Bergman, Paul, Berman-Barrett, Sara. The Criminal Law Handbook. 9th ed. Berkeley, CA: Nolo Publishing, 2007.
Being one of my first sources for information, this book led me to such cases as Katz vs. United States and the Patriot Act. It gave
a very brief overview of the wiretapping debate, without a significant bias toward either side. It was peer reviewed by several
attorneys, and legal professionals, and cited the cases that were brought up in a manner that allowed me to find them easily. I
found it a good source for starting out, though technical details in the debate were provided by other means.
"FISA" Pub.L. 95-511, 92 Stat. 1783, enacted October 25, 1978, 50 U.S.C. ch.36
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was passed by the legislature in an effort to ensure Fourth Amendment protections
without compromising too much security. It allowed warrantless wiretapping for up to one year with the proper permissions and
endorsements. It set up a court specifically designed to judge whether or not to issue warrants for surveillance, called the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Court. In addition, an appeals court was also established, called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Court of Review, which ruled in favor of the Protect America Act of 2007, an amendment to the original FISA. As a law passed
by Congress FISA does not have the level of constitutional force as a Supreme Court decision, but should be considered when
making future court decisions.
Risen, James and Lichtblau, Eric. “Court Affirms Wiretapping Without Warrants; [National Desk]” The New
York Times Jan 16, 2009: pg. A.13
Established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act passed in 1978 by Congress, The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
of Review ruled in favor of Congress’ amendment to the original FISA bill that would give the executive branch the complete
power to wiretap in the name of national security (The Protect America Act of 2007) This article about the FISC case is written by
a journalist for the New York Times, a well known and established newspaper with sufficient credibility for a case such as this.