Two US Supreme Court justices have admitted in front of the National Press Club that the country's to court has no choice but to decide on the controversial surveillance activities of the National Security Agency, TechCrunch said.
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia told the club that the US' high court is the least qualified institution to decide on the federal agency's activities.
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, on the other hand, explained, "[The court] can't run away and say, ‘Well, we don't know much about that subject so we won't decide it.'"
Ginsburg nonetheless, thanked the media for its key role in exposing the surveillance methods of the NSA, which have appalled not only the public, but also the friendly countries and allies of the US as well. She excused the media of possible sin and said, "I think the press has played a tremendously important role as watchdog over what the government is doing. That keeps the government from getting too far out of line. Yes, there are excesses in the press, but we have to put up with that."
TechCrunch cited a Politico article, which encapsulated the justices' agreement that the freedom of speech is the most important of freedoms as indicated in the country's Bill of Rights.
TechCrunch said that the method of how the Supreme Court will vote on the NSA's surveillance activities was pivotal in a sense that potential rulings on legal cases regarding the federal agency's eavesdropping programs could undermine legislative efforts as long as the issue that was raised in the US' high court is done in quick order. The tech blog argued that if Congress passes a moderate reform on the surveillance programs, and the Supreme Court disapproves mass surveillance like bulk data collection, there is not much to do in both legislative chambers. If it goes another way and the Supreme Court decides the NSA's surveillance programs fall within the US Constitution, it would reportedly empower intelligence officials against those who wanted to curb its political power.
