Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

State and Federal Governents Clash on NSA Snooping

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the sovereign-is-such-an-underrated-word dept.

An anonymous reader writes "In what could set the stage for an indirect decision over the NSA domestic surveillance program, The Justice Department has threatened the state of Maine with a lawsuit should the state's Public Utilities Commission investigate complaints from Maine customers that Verizon, by cooperating with the NSA without their customers' consent, violated privacy laws. Maine's PUC is expected to make its decision today.

(More from the article below.) From the linked article: "Verizon may have broken the law, and the Department of Justice is overstepping its bounds in trying to intimidate the state PUC from investigating the potential violation," said Shenna Bellows, executive director of the Maine Civil Liberties Union. "And I do think it sets an extraordinarily dangerous precedent for the federal government to threaten to sue the state, (which is) merely doing its job."
The Maine complaint, filed in May by 22 Verizon customers, is one of several similar cases around the country. The cases were sparked by news reports alleging that phone companies have cooperated with government surveillance efforts by providing the domestic phone call records of millions of Americans.
In Vermont, where state officials are considering whether to open an investigation of Verizon and AT&T, the Justice Department has come down against the idea. The department has filed lawsuits to prevent the disclosure of information in New Jersey and Missouri."

12 of 75 comments (clear)

  1. how dare by MrSquirrel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How dare the state of Maine prosecute the federal government engaging in illegal activities! Let's hope the U.S. DOJ gets a proper smack-down in the courts... otherwise we're all fscked!

    --
    A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing.
  2. the GOP will protect us! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't worry - States' rights is a major part of the Republican platform.

    You know - along with smaller government and less federal spending.

    Right?

    Whenever I hear a Republican utter the phrase "tax and spend Democrat," I almost bust a gut laughing (and crying inside) thinking about the current deficit.

    1. Re:the GOP will protect us! by failure-man · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Stupid tax-and-spend liberals. The wise Republican party has proven that borrow-and-spend is the way to go. I mean, why tax for things now when you can jack people with it who aren't even born yet . . . . . .

    2. Re:the GOP will protect us! by bky1701 · · Score: 3, Funny

      And these are the people that bitch about software pirates! We are only doing the same as them, or if anything they are worse!

      --
      Great Intellect...
  3. Oh how things change by tansey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Amazing how 30 years ago, Nixon knows about some burglary and some audio tapes being stolen, and he is forced to resign. Then 10 years ago, Clinton gets a few BJs and has a 3 year investigation leading to an impeachment and a 3000 page report filed. And now, all these things are going on--most of which are orders of magnitude worse-- and they get hardly any news coverage, the president is under no real pressure about them, and the bulk of Americans couldn't care less.

    All I can think now is that line from V for Vendetta: "There's something terribly wrong with this country."

    1. Re:Oh how things change by kcbrown · · Score: 5, Insightful
      And now, all these things are going on--most of which are orders of magnitude worse-- and they get hardly any news coverage, the president is under no real pressure about them, and the bulk of Americans couldn't care less.

      The bulk of Americans couldn't care less because the bulk of Americans aren't very aware of it. They're not very aware of it because they get their information primarily from the mass media. The mass media isn't covering it because the mass media is in favor of it. Or, more precisely, the owners of the mass media are.

      Fascism is, by definition, very friendly to big business. Friendlier by far than a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. A government in which the ruler(s) stay in power for decades is, to such people, more stable and more predictable, and thus more easily managed and thus more desirable, than one in which the players can change every few years. I dare say that many/most of those who own big businesses like the mass media want fascism and are doing what they can to make it happen, because it promises to give them greater power than what they have right now (whether or not it will do so in the end remains to be seen).

      And, depressingly, the trend towards fascism is happening throughout the world. This, too, isn't surprising, because it promises to benefit those who own the large multinational corporations.

      --
      Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
    2. Re:Oh how things change by jafac · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I dare say that many/most of those who own big businesses like the mass media want fascism and are doing what they can to make it happen, because it promises to give them greater power than what they have right now

      Ironically, this is precisely what we were warned about in the 1980's when Regan did away with the FCC's "fairness doctrine" and began to erode media ownership rules so that media outlets could be consolidated into fewer and fewer large players.

      Very funny - that everything that has come to pass (including 9/11, if you think about it, or if you had read PNAC's website prior to 2001) was pretty much foretold - and discredited as "liberal whining".

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  4. Federal government vs. enough states = by Spazntwich · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The feds WILL lose.

    Hopefully this will restir the notion of state's rights, because it's obvious when all of the power is condensed into one entity, the stage is set for massive abuse.

    The founding fathers knew this. Society seems to have forgotten this. We need a clash of the titans like this to hopefully reawaken some interest in maintaining the sanctity of our rights and freedoms.

    1. Re:Federal government vs. enough states = by gray+code · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Eh, the states in favor of strong states rights thought the same thing in 1861. I guess 11 isn't "enough".

  5. Bravo Maine! Down with Everyone Else by shoma-san · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Congrats to the State of Maine for being the first to grow some balls. And for the rest of you - Bite my shiny metal ass!

    Why? The people in this country have something to say about the current state of things but have yet to act upon what the morals that govern them. They talk about how wrong the President is but yet they vote him into office again. They shout " I don't want my phone tapped," but they do it in the comfort of their home where they can't be arrested. They say "let us be moral and leaders of the free world," yet they think "a little bit of torture never hurt anyone as long as its in Cuba." And here we are - you and I paying our taxes and showing our teeth like its all okay.

    We can sit here and piss and moan about this all day long but until smart people like most of the folks here at slashdot do something, it's all yapping and no substance. No one can ever say that anything got accomplished right the first time by a leader who leads from the back of the bus or that a bunch of grumbling average joes got something done. You might as well be telling 'You're Mama's So Fat Jokes' than wasting you're time talking to the TV as you sit on your fat ass eating Salsa Verde Dorritoes.

    So go ahead and mod me down or call me a troll because I don't care. Someone needs to tell America the truth and stand up for whats right. I'm moving to Maine...

  6. Can the PUC pull Verizon's charter for this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The question that I have is this: if the Public Utilities Comission asks Verizon point-blank: "did you do this?" and Verizon says "we won't tell you if we did or not," does that response constitute grounds for the Public Utilities Commission to revoke Verizon's charter in Maine?

    That is to say, quite aside from the question of whether or not Verizon is guilty of wrongdoing in the matter of the wiretapping, it seems reasonable that a refusal to cooperate with the Public Utilities Commission investigation would itself be grounds for the commission to rescind Verizon's monopoly privilege in the state.

  7. A double security to the people ... by triclipse · · Score: 4, Informative
    "This balance between the National and State governments ought to be dwelt on with peculiar attention, as it is of the utmost importance. It forms a double security to the people. If one encroaches on their rights they will find a powerful protection in the other. Indeed, they will both be prevented from overpassing their constitutional limits by a certain rivalship, which will ever subsist between them."

    -- Alexander Hamilton (speech to the New York Ratifying Convention, 17 June 1788)

    Reference: The Works of Alexander Hamilton, Henry Cabot Lodge, ed., vol. 2 (28)

    --
    No Inflation Taxation without Representation