FISA is a rubber stamp court with zero oversight.
In America they spy on dissidents too. It's just a matter of calling them terrorists.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/privacy-and-surv...
In America they spy on dissidents too. It's just a matter of calling them terrorists.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/privacy-and-surv...
It'd be a real court if there were a sort of public defender, and the judges simply mediated between both sides. You could see it working in the warrants rejected.
In fact the court is adversarial, though not like you seem to be envisioning. There are many courts in the US, in fact most where no litigation happens because it's inappropriate for the task. So the idea that they are playing "both sides" is a non sequitur.
The role of the court is to ensure that requests are legal and there is sufficient evidence to pursue the task as requested. It's exactly the same as when a judge issues a warrant.