Today's ruling

Don't forget, the key word is warrantless:

It was never the intent of the Framers to give the President such unfettered control, particularly where his actions blatantly disregard the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

-- U.S. District Court Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, in a ruling today that strikes down the National Security Agency's warrantless domestic spying program.

UPDATE - Here's a comment from AMERICAblog on the subject:

The laws are actually really friendly for law enforcement--they can even apply after the fact for a retroactive warrant. But because they're not taking that route, it seems likely that they're using the wiretaps not to fight terrorism or crime, but to spy on their political opponents, which would include journalists, activists, writers, musicians, and just about anyone else.

Be sure to make this point with all your wing-nut friends: The ruling does not strike down spying. It just says you have to get a warrant. If they don't want to get a warrant, it must mean that at least part of the spying they're doing has nothing to do with terrorism.