◆ SpookStack

- ,, Approved For Release 2008/11/06 : CIA-RDP04M01816R000502010009-4 30 mail opening programs began, there was apparently no constitutional need for judicial approval of a program of covert openings of international mail, so long as the mail was resealed and sent on to its destination without censorship. The law established by Olmstead did not begin to change until 196I, when the Supreme Court decided in Silverman v. United States 365 U.S. 505, that the Fourth 'Amendment applied to a listening device or "bug" placed by physical trespass in the wall of an office, even though the device did not prevent conversations from taking place. Silverman, however,left the remainder of the Olmstead analysis untouched. During these years there also were serious questions whether the judiciary was empowered under Article III of the Constitution to issue surveillance orders. Respected 12/ scholars- 13/ and at least one Justice of the Supreme Court~ argued that surveillance orders issued !?f. parte were not part of a "case or controversy" if they were not: part of a. criminal prosecution, and so judges lacked power to issue them. They argued, as well, that surveillance orders could ·12/ See,.!..;,.&•, Telford Taylor, Two Studies in Constitutional Interpretation: Search, Seizure, and Surveillance 77-93 (1969). 13/ Osborn v. United States, 385 U.S. 323, 353 (1966) (Douglas, J.,concurring). A roved For Release 2008/11/06: CIA-RDP04M01816R000502010009-4