Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Secret Court: Government Lied to Get Wiretaps Approved

Posted by michael on from the blindfolded-and-wielding-a-sword dept.

Paersona writes "Ever wonder what Colleen Kollar-Kotelly is doing to pass the time while she waits for the next step in the Microsoft case? Apparently she is now serving as the lead justice of the FISA court that oversees intelligence agencies' requests for domestic wiretapping. Today, the Washington Post reveals that the FISA court has released a rare public report rebuking the FBI and Justice Department for their handling of wiretap requests." The New York Times also has a story about the FISA court. The court's opinion is available.

7 of 373 comments (clear)

  1. For perspective... by chill · · Score: 5, Informative

    More wiretap requets were approved under the Clinton administration (8 years) than under the Reagan and Bush (the first) combined (12 years).

    Reagan's excuse was the War on Communism. Clinton's was the War on Drugs. GW's is going to be the War on Terrorism.

    BTW, we *ARE* talking about wiretaps on U.S. citizens and on U.S. soil. The CIA has jurisdiction for foreign nationals and there is a much less stringent procedure. (i.e. -- insert tape, push "record")

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:For perspective... by shaldannon · · Score: 4, Informative

      From what I read of the article it sounded like the concern *was* that "insert tape, push record" evidence was being acquired from NSA/CIA/etc and used in FBI investigations and (later) in court.

      Still, I'm bothered by the ongoing trend I see here. We have cross-pollenation of surveilance info amongst the three-letter-agencies, we have things like Carnivore and Magic Lantern, and we've seen the FBI use its power irresponsibly in the cases of the Branch Davidians and others.

      While I don't necessarily agree with the ideas of those sorts of people that find themselves under government scrutiny (cults (define cult please...), militia groups, etc), I think we've seen plenty enough evidence that certain government agencies, particularly under the Clinton administration, were running out of control. (I am libertarian, so this is not good old fashioned Republican-beats-up-on-Democrat).

      The other thing that bothers me is that we know there is a secret court reviewing this sort of stuff...what is going on that we don't know about and may not be subject to review (besides IRS audits)?

      --


      What is your Slash Rating?
    2. Re:For perspective... by Sloppy · · Score: 3, Informative
      The wiretaps are taking place for your protection.
      Most of the time, probably. But not always. There's a reason the Bill O' Rights dudes bothered to put that stuff about due process and unreasonable searches in there. They wanted government to have the power to do the unpleasant jobs that it needs to do, to protect us. But they also knew that much power would attract abuse (because it always does), so there need to be restrictions on how it can be used.

      need to lie to the courts. The courts want the Bad Guys caught, don't they?

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  2. Da Motts by realgone · · Score: 4, Informative
    Can anyone find a link to the document the court released yesterday?
    You mean this link on the same page as the Washington Post article? =)

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/tr anscripts/fisa_opinion.pdf

  3. Non-NYTimes story Links by uncleFester · · Score: 5, Informative

    Found these via Drudge...

    Special Court Rejects Ashcroft Rules and Secret Court Rebuffs Ashcroft (related to the main story).

    And from the second story... "The department discovered the misrepresentations and reported them to the FISA court beginning in 2000.".. which means the improper actions occured before 2000.. i.e. Before Bush. So Bush/Ashcroft are not responsible for those infractions.

    Having said that (and despite being a conservative), I do hope these revalations reign in some of the trampling of civil liberties Ashcroft/Bush are considering. I fully understand their desire to fight terrorism, and I understand some liberties we were used to in the past may be crimped in the process. But eliminated? Virtually removed? A number of their proposals (and some things currently put in place) are simply troubling and I hope this is a wake-up call they cannot simply trample over the Constitution in the name of protecting the public. Freedom is not without its risks, either to those who defend it or the society which enjoys it. We all simply need to be aware of that risk and vigilant in our own way to insure we don't lose our freedom to either the terrorist, the criminal or our own government.

    (and no, I don't get my music via gnutella either)

    -'fester

    --
    -'fester
  4. Re:Who gives a rats ass. by chill · · Score: 3, Informative

    1. Probably

    2. Probably, though there might be a lot of finger pointing at people no longer in positions of authority. Lots of political bullshit.

    3. Wrong. The majority of the wiretaps approved during the Clinton administration were for the "War on Drugs", not terrorists. And we're not talking "Big Columbian Drug Lord", either. We are talking general U.S. Citizens. The CIA/NSA doesn't need special permission to wiretap non-citizens outside the U.S. -- that is the very DEFINITION of their existence. The FBI deals with U.S. Citizens and U.S. soil, thus the oversight needed.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  5. Citing... by chill · · Score: 3, Informative

    Okay.

    The source for current information is the U.S. Courts website on wiretaps. This covers 1997-2001. Archival information (pre-1997) is available through the U.S. Gov't Printing Office.

    What the FBI is allowed to do is summarized on the FBi Website FAQ. I quote the relavant question:

    Q. Are FBI Special Agents permitted to install wiretaps at their own discretion?

    A. No. Wiretapping is one of the FBI's most sensitive techniques and is strictly controlled by federal statutes. It is used infrequently and then only to combat the most serious crimes and terrorism. Title 18, United States Code, Section 2516, contains the protocol requiring all law enforcement officers to establish probable cause that the wiretaps may provide evidence of a felony violation of federal law. After determining if a sufficient showing of probable cause has been made, impartial federal judges approve or disapprove wiretaps. The approving judge then must continue to monitor how the wiretap is being conducted. Wiretapping without meeting these stringent requirements and obtaining the necessary court orders is a serious felony under the law.

    Finally, this site is a good jumping off point for further information on wiretaps and Judicial oversight.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.