Could Congress pass a resolution or a law authorizing the President of the US to violate the 4th Amendment rights of Americans via 'spying' by permitting warrantless searches or seizures of protected zones without having probable cause absent the well defined classes of cases that presently exist that permit such warrantless searches (none of which permit this outrageous conduct)?
Of course not.
So, what does it matter if - as Bush argues - the war resolution can be read (which it cannot) to implicitly or explicitly authorize these searches (an idiotic argument indeed)?
The entire dialogue is ludicrous. Entering into the debate as if the Congressional "war resolution" could - if it said so - authorize violations of the 4th Amendment is to accept a red herring and eat it too.
Again: The 4th Amendment OF THE US CONSTITUTION overrides the power of congress or the president, or the judiciary in this instance. End of argument. If the president does not have the inherent power to do these warrantless searches, congress could not give it to him.
A first month law student with crim const law under his/her belt knows this to be true.