So let me get this straight — of course the NSA's warrantless snooping is legal, says the Bush administration, because the program was vetted by executive branch lawyers, who exercised legal judgment independent of their client, we're supposed to believe. Meanwhile, down the street, we shouldn't put too much stock in things Sam Alito wrote in the 80s when he was a government lawyer in the Reagan administration, because he was just doing his client's bidding. Which is it?
You're confusing two very different cases - possibly by accident, possibly because you want to see something controversial that's simply not there. The case against Mitchell was one of domestic wiretaps, unlike the NSA wiretaps. Alito's opinion back then was very clear, i.e., re executive immunity, and really has nothing to do with the question of legality of the current situation.
