Bush fought the law ... and the law ...er ...won.

The text of a letter from a clutch of leading academic lawyers is available on Line here (PDF alert 10 pages) explaining why the warrantless wiretapping perpetrated by the Administration , aided by the telco's is illegal.

Dear Members of Congress:

"We are a group of constitutional law scholars and former government officials, writing in our individual capacities. Earlier this year we wrote you two letters (dated January 9 and February 2, 2006) explaining why, in our view, the recently disclosed National Security Agency (NSA) electronic surveillance program is unlawful under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), and why the Department of Justice (DOJ)’s legal defense of that surveillance program is unpersuasive.

We will not repeat our previous arguments here. We write now merely to explain how the Supreme Court’s recent decision concerning military commissions, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 126 S. Ct. 2749 (2006), further refutes the only two legal arguments that the DOJ has offered in support of the NSA program—(i) that the September 18, 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) authorizes the NSA program; and (ii) that if FISA prohibits the NSA program, it unconstitutionally restricts the President’s powers under Article II of the U.S. Constitution."

Shayana Kadidal at Huffington Post explains in less lawerly detail what this means and the consequences....

"When the Supreme Court rejected President Bush's executive power claims in last month's decision invalidating the Guantánamo military tribunals, it also shredded the administration's arguments for domestic spying. Now a bipartisan group of legal experts and former government officials are explaining to Congress exactly how the court's ruling affects the NSA's illegal domestic spying program." ... Read on.

That should take the grin off Alberto's face....... but it won't.