Slashdot Mirror
EFF Case Against AT&T To Go Forward
Tyler Too writes "The NSA wiretap lawsuit filed by the EFF will apparently be moving forward. A federal judge has denied the government's request that the EFF's lawsuit against AT&T be dismissed. Among other things, the judge ruled that 'if the government has been truthful in its disclosures, divulging information on AT&T's role in the scandal should not cause any harm to national security.' The case will now move forward, pending a government appeal."
"if the government has been truthful in its disclosures, divulging information on AT&T's role in the scandal should not cause any harm to national security."
Sounds like the "terrorists" might've won.
But sounds good to me, but i'm a filthy liberal.
So yeah, if you have a few bucks, they could probably use it. I realize it's only our basic liberties, but let's be honest -- if you don't donate your spare cash to the EFF, you're just going to waste it on booze.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
"if the government has been truthful in its disclosures, divulging information on AT&T's role in the scandal should not cause any harm to national security."
Is that like "if you have nothing to hide, you won't object to surveillance"? Seriously, poor government!
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
I certainly look forward to seeing just how much the phone companies have been aiding the NSA. With the abuses leaked regarding the "terrorist surveillence program" related to international phone calls, the warrantless surveilance of American citizens certainly needs to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into the light of day.
AFAIK, the government has always gotten "national security" cases such as this thrown out of court, this change represents a very good historical first! The Right of Petition is still alive in the US!!!!
They came for the Communists, and I didn't object - For I wasn't a Communist; They came for the Socialists, and I didn'
It's nice to see the intended balance of power in our government begin to stabilize once more. When one or more sides start to get out of hand, the other side steps in! Sort of like rock-paper-scissors, but C-SPAN covers the matches. I eagerly await the incensed cries of "activist judges!"
A man once asked the Prophet, "What is a sin?" The Prophet Muhammed replied, "When something pricks your conscience, gi
It is nice to see the Judicial branch keep the Executive branch in check. What's even nicer is that the lower court will have the power to see if the Executive branch has been telling the truth without going to the supreme court. As a US citizen I am comforted by this news.
There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
IANAL and didn't RTFA, but AFAICT the EFF stands for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Is there heaven? Is there Hell? Is that a Tuna Melt I smell?-Primus
I don't understand how invading a country protects my freedom. Or how, terrorists threaten my freedom. They can blow shit up all they want, but I still have freedom of speech and religion. Or how by violating our civil rights, our Government protects our freedom. How is this true??
The only threat to my freedom has been my own Government. They are the ones (and unfortunately, the majority is letting them) who are trying to restrict the freedom of the press with their lawsuits over leaks. They are the ones who are violating citizens rights by spying on them.
This case is protecting our rights and fredoms that, let's see, were violated by our Government.
I'd rather live free and live with the vry remote possiblity of dying in a terrorist attach than having my Government take my rights away to protect my Freedom!
I've been voting and writing letters, but, unfortunately, the cowards run the show.
Since the Government isn't a defendent, and as the US has no meaningful concept of "contempt of court" or perjury, the court can't do anything about it if the Government is found guilty of lying. On the other hand, this is election year, which is not a good year to be found guilty of anything, even if there is nothing the courts can do.
My guess is that the Government will do anything and everything to stall proceedings, such that if there is a trial, there's absolutely no risk of anything embarassing being said before polling day. If they're in power, they can clean things up afterwards. If they're not, it's no longer their problem.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Federal judges sit until resignation, death, or impeachment and conviction by the Senate, for this very reason.
Is it so sad or what that it is in fact the two elected branches of government that are running the country into the ground while the other one with its appointments and life terms is the only thing standing in their way? I'm beginning to think people are really that stupid.
Ironically, unhampered security groups do lead to invasions and killing of hundred of thousands of people. Personally I don't think that the NSA is even remotly comparable to the Gestopo, but what if in 20 years a power hungry psycho uses the massive amount of power we let the NSA have today to declare a defacto dictatorship?
If we make the Presidency so powerful and unhampered as well as its agencies then corrupt evil people desiring power will seek this position. We must keep the Presidents and security groups in check so that this never happens.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Basically, he's saying that, yes, there are state secrets, but the judiciary -- not the executive -- is responsible for determining how trials involving state secrets proceed. This idea of someone crying 'State Secrets!!!1!!1!one!11!!!' and automatically getting a case tossed out is relatively new, and, as most of us here believe, contrary to the basic premise of the court system.
... turning to the 3-D map, we see an unmistakable con
Aw crap... in researching the judge I did a more general search and pulled up the wrong judge.
Oddly, the real Judge Vaughn Walker was also appointed by Reagan and then appointed Chief Justice by George H. W. Bush. But, as you state, to the N.D. of California, not to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals (which is in an entirely different part of the country).
So this probably was a "career limiting" move if the neo-cons retain control of the Republican party. They certainly won't reward him with a Appelatte court position and the Democrats are unlikely to appoint a conservative judge to the 9th.
Which makes it an even better story really... since it means that he's likely ruling with the law rather than with politics. And, better yet, it means the appeal has to go to the 9th Appellate court, which is unlikely to overturn his decision.
Someone go mod down my earlier post. Thanks.