To that end, I still don’t think that just because a legislative body deemed something ‘necessary and proper’ at one time that that decision was valid, necessary, or proper.

I’m not some flaming liberal here, but I think there are ambiguities to scrutinize when different courts (however low or high: they still have to go to law school) can interpret the laws governing things like the Patriot Act in ways that conflict.

However, the essence of being “constitutional” is conforming to the dictates of the Constitution. The constitution states plainly in the aforementioned clause that Congress DOES have the power to make any law which is “necessary and proper.” Granted, it is fairly vague language, and that is why it is called the “elastic” clause. Nonetheless, it validates the constitutionality of the Patriot Act.

And in reference to the article you linked, the ruling of one judge means virtually nothing. This is compounded by the reality that he is merely the judge for the U. S. District Court of the Southern District of New York. The Supreme Court is the real deciding group, and I can almost assure you they would rule the Patriot Act as constitutional.

However, I take issue with your stance on “constitutionality,” as well as with your view of Professor Yoo.

First off, Professor Yoo is an honorable man who deserves our respect for his intellectual achievements and willingness to stand up for what he believes is right and true in the face of extensive opposition, regardless of whether we agree with the man or not.

Secondly, neither John Yoo, nor Congress, nor the Executive Branch violated the constitution in writing, passing, and implementing(respectively) the Patriot Act. You may be familiar with the “necessary and proper” clause or “elastic” clause of the Constitution, which states:

Article I, Section 8, “Clause” 18:
“The Congress shall have power …To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.”

Congress deemed it necessary and proper, for the safety of Americans, to pass the Patriot Act. There is nothing unconstitutional in the slightest about that.