This is ridiculous.

The previous standard (postal inspectors could search the letter in the event of a ticking time bomb type of scenario only, otherwise get a warrant) is probably ideal.

From what I understand of the law exigent circumstances usually kick in to allow warrantless searches in extremely special situations (gun wielding maniac runs into house/backyard during a foot pursuit by police, violent crackhead is holding a bag during his arrest so police search it for weapons, etc) where time is of the essence. There is no similar situation here. This is snail mail. If somebody is stupid enough to send material having anything to do with crime or terrorism through the mail there is nothing precluding the postal inspectors in such an extreme case from "losing" the piece of mail for a day and not delivering it until they can take it before a judge.

What harm could there be in finding a judge willing to review the case and take an application for a search warrant? Don't most major municipalities have a judge on call 24/7 for these types of things in emergencies? I wouldn't be surprised if the FBI/Postal Inspection folks have a list of judges they can consult with when emergencies arise, even over the phone if need be.

Cowboy antics such as this which attempt to play fast and loose with the rules in this country are dangerous, IMHO. There will be a strong chance of whatever is found being ruled inadmissable in court and the suspects going free, not to mention the erosion in general of civil liberties and personal privacy. I imagine there are now tons of lawyers and a few civil liberties groups ready for the first case to go to trial (is it too much to hope in this day and age that they will actually bring the folks to trial?) on this type of evidence so that it may be challenged and probably overturned, thus wasting government time and resources.

Do it the right way and make sure criminals* do not go free. It's good enough for me.

*: I say criminals because while most of these laws are putatively designed to catch "terrorists" it appears to me that they end up being used more and more to prosecute everyday run of the mill type offenders.

Roses are red, some diamonds are blue, and that's Mr. pO157 to you.

... this too shall pass.  One hopes whomever succeeds Bush remembers that he or she sits there through the consent of the governed and the governed don't really like crap like warrantless searches.  

January 20th,2009 can't get here soon enough for me.

Illegitimi non carborundum.

This, like Dubbya's other odious signing statements, will most likely not be repealed.  It's early in the new Congress, but I wonder if the Dems have the stones to repeal any of these power-grabbing provisions (that is, if they can be repealed.  What is the process for removing such signing statements?).  The Dems, or anyone for that matter, who decide to tackle these issues will be drinking from the firehose--where do you begin on such things?  The warrantless wiretapping?  The "Terrorist List" (which, by way of a really stupid gag gift, my father's name appears)?  The removal of the White House's visitor list?  Here's a good list of some of Dubbya's 'rectifications'.
By all means, take this statement as Bush Bashing, because that's my intent:  The Worst President.  Ever.  

As always, we see plenty of complaints about Bush's signing statement, but not passing thought to what change in the law prompted it. So, here a link to the entire bill (PDF). The controversy started over section 1010(e), below:

(e) AUTHORITY TO FIX RATES AND CLASSES GENERALLY; REQUIREMENT RELATING TO LETTERS SEALED AGAINST INSPECTION.--Section 404 of title 39, United States Code (as amended by section 102) is further amended by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as sub-sections (d) and (e), respectively, and by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
``(b) Except as otherwise provided, the Governors are
authorized to establish reasonable and equitable classes of
mail and reasonable and equitable rates of postage and
fees for postal services in accordance with the provisions
of chapter 36. Postal rates and fees shall be reasonable
and equitable and sufficient to enable the Postal Service,
under best practices of honest, efficient, and economical
management, to maintain and continue the development
of postal services of the kind and quality adapted to the
needs of the United States.
``(c) The Postal Service shall maintain one or more
classes of mail for the transmission of letters sealed
against inspection. The rate for each such class shall be
uniform throughout the United States, its territories, and
possessions. One such class shall provide for the most expeditious
handling and transportation afforded mail matter by
the Postal Service. No letter of such a class of domestic
origin shall be opened except under authority of
a search warrant authorized by law, or by an officer or
employee of the Postal Service for the sole purpose of
determining an address at which the letter can be delivered,
or pursuant to the authorization of the addressee.''.

So, the the law affixes two things into the US Code which weren't there before. The pursuant one is (c), which is intended to gather current law about the dispensation of suspicious mail into one section under the Post Office section.

But there's the rub: the new law doesn't do what was intended. As passed, the new law offers no formal recognition of other currently legal authority outside search warrants. Before this change, the Post Office would have been subject to the need for search warrants in normal cases and also to the Emergency Powers Act in more extreme cases. In other words, it increases the power of the judicial branch at the expense of the executive.

This signing statement restores, not harms, the balance of power between the federal government branches.