Probable Cause? Not per Haydn

From Dan Froomkin's White House Briefing 8 May...

One thing we do know is that Hayden didn't only misinterpret the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution during a January speech at the National Press Club; he sanctimoniously tried to correct a reporter who got it right.

Here's the Fourth Amendment : "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

When Jonathan Landay of Knight Ridder Newspapers properly characterized it, Hayden insisted, incorrectly, that that requirement for search and seizure was reasonableness, rather than probable cause.

Said Hayden: "Just to be very clear -- and believe me, if there's any amendment to the Constitution that employees of the National Security Agency are familiar with, it's the Fourth. And it is a reasonableness standard in the Fourth Amendment. And so what you've raised to me -- and I'm not a lawyer, and don't want to become one -- what you've raised to me is, in terms of quoting the Fourth Amendment, is an issue of the Constitution. The constitutional standard is 'reasonable.' And we believe -- I am convinced that we are lawful because what it is we're doing is reasonable."

Well, it's nice to know he's convinced. If if only he - and they - were correct.