posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 12:04 AM
Absolutely it's unconstitutional..
Unfortunately, it's also allowed under provisions of the PATRIOT ACT.
This most misnamed act in US history takes away more Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms than any other bill in US history, and provides Government
agents the ability to enter your home at any time, without cause, without a warrant, even when you're not home, and they don't even have to tell you
they were there.
And the USA re-elected the President who signed off on this henious piece of legislature, which was passed ELEVEN DAYS after 9/11.
About the only act that ever got passed quicker than this after its introduction was the bank bailout of 2008.
Of course, the current President extended provisions annually three times and just signed off on a four year extension of all the provisions that by
definition of the bill itself were supposed to be renewed annually "after careful review".
Oh well, the same current President also hasn't returned the over $700 billion from the Treasury that was lent to the banks under TARP - it's simply
been realocated to other programs once repaid. The money was given to the US Government by Congress to be used ONLY for TARP money and was to be
repaid to the Treasury IMMEDIATELY upon repayment to the Government, and was specifically setup to not be used for ANY OTHER PURPOSE, AT ALL.
Democratic Presidents are just at bad at breaking the rules as Republican Presidents.
edit on 12-6-2011 by babybunnies because: (no reason