Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EFF Sues To Overturn Telecom Immunity

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the not-that-it-will-do-much-good dept.

Mike writes "The title says it all — The EFF is suing to have the unconstitutional telecom immunity overturned. 'In a brief filed in the US District Court [PDF] in San Francisco, the EFF argues that the flawed FISA Amendments Act (FAA) violates the federal government's separation of powers as established in the Constitution and robs innocent telecom customers of their rights without due process of law. [...] "We have overwhelming record evidence that the domestic spying program is operating far outside the bounds of the law," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl. "Intelligence agencies, telecoms, and the Administration want to sweep this case under the rug, but the Constitution won't permit it."'"

21 of 369 comments (clear)

  1. Good luck with that by Weaselmancer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Intelligence agencies, telecoms, and the Administration want to sweep this case under the rug, but the Constitution won't permit it.

    This administration does what it wants, without repercussions. They've already done several things that go against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They don't care, won't care, and have never cared about trifles like the founding documents of the country.

    What will happen? W will claim executive privilege, file papers blocking the motion, then make looking at the papers illegal again citing executive privilege.

    It's Orwellian, but that - or something equally bizarre - is what will happen. Count on it.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:Good luck with that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If it happens, it happens, but at least they're trying.

    2. Re:Good luck with that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What makes you think that either side is going to stop unauthorized search/surveillance? Governments aren't well-known for giving up power unless forced into it. The guns are a completely separate issue. The national guard does not fear my shotgun.

    3. Re:Good luck with that by FireStormZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Gross oversimplification:

      Both will restrict our rights across huge swaths of areas just in a proportionally different manner. The lesser of two evils increasingly looks like a third party vote or vote one party into the white house and the other into congress in the hopes that they spend more time bickering than doing anything..

      --
      "Ahh! Arrogance and stupidity in the same package, how efficient of you!" --Londo Molari
    4. Re:Good luck with that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The administration has done only what it has been allowed to do. If nobody stops them there can be no other outcome. It is not the administration that has failed; it is us.

    5. Re:Good luck with that by FireStormZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hillary and the congressional dems who voted for the war and continuing funding can go with him...

      --
      "Ahh! Arrogance and stupidity in the same package, how efficient of you!" --Londo Molari
    6. Re:Good luck with that by cats-paw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The real tragedy is that our congresscritters are allowing it to happen.

      The republicans are enthusiastic about law and order at the expense of liberty, and the democrats have yet to become vertebrates.

      Separation of powers isn't just a good idea, it's essential to the proper operation of our system.

      --
      Absolute statements are never true
    7. Re:Good luck with that by TheLazySci-FiAuthor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In a revolution is it better to have guns, or to have the knowledge to make guns?

      Freedom of speech is everything.

      --
      Read my Very Short "Stories"
    8. Re:Good luck with that by bbernard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It does make me wonder...would they not have been better waiting another 3 weeks--or until late January--to bring this suit so W has less, uh, clout with which to sweep this under the rug?

      --
      ----- Connection reset by beer
    9. Re:Good luck with that by cawpin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wrong. In the end, it comes to force. If you have no arms, they can outlaw what they want. Your freedom of speech is worthless without arms to back it up. The 2nd Amendment is America's 1st freedom.

    10. Re:Good luck with that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Cthulhu '08. Why vote for a lesser evil?

    11. Re:Good luck with that by R2.0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The national guard does not fear my shotgun."

      Sure about that? If Obama were to order the Army to go in and pacify Central PA, there would at least be desertions and possibly mutiny.

      Or as a friend of mine says, when some smartypants pulls out the "what is your shotgun going to do against a tank?" question:

      "They have to get out to take a piss sooner or later."

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    12. Re:Good luck with that by X0563511 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then don't vote for them. Democrats and Republicans are not the only parties, and it really gets me irritated that people (en masse) seem to think they are.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    13. Re:Good luck with that by dwillden · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Having spent the last 15 years in the Army, most of it in the National Guard, I call BS on your claims. I'm not saying someone didn't express such sentiments to him but they are not part of any organized or approved training and or indoctrination.

      I dare say you'll find more gun enthusiasts and 2nd Amendment supporters in the Military than in any other significant grouping of American Citizens gathered from across the nation.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    14. Re:Good luck with that by schwaang · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If Waco or Iraq is any model (*everyone* has an AK), then no, your shotgun isn't going to cut it ever. Your roadside bomb would be a different story. But I'm not going to learn how to make one "just in case".

      The possibility of tyranny, however small, is why we should all support the EFF here. You fight the tyranny *before* it happens, through political means, so that you don't have to use that shotgun.

    15. Re:Good luck with that by Dhalka226 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You'd think after the whole Bill Clinton impeachment fiasco they'd be dying for some payback. But they didn't go for it. Why?

      Because it backfired. Not only did it not succeed in removing him from office, the majority of Americans found it to be petty. Increasingly so as time wore on. Many Republicans these days will even admit it was a mistake. (Not the talking heads on the radio, to be sure; their job is to rile people up.)

      The article you linked verifies my point (if you actually followed the conclusion). Kucinich introduced articles of impeachment. The Republicans all voted FOR them; they desperately wanted them to come to a vote so that they could paint the Democrats as vindictive morons more concerned with taking their revenge on a president they don't like than governing the nation. Who cast them into oblivion? Democrats. Because they knew it. When the party that SHOULD support something opposes it and the one that should do everything they can to kill it wants it to proceed, you know there's some nasty politics going on. From the Democrats' perspective, it is much more important to get a democratic president elected now than it was to try to impeach Bush then.

      Personally I wish he had been removed from office, because I think Bush has clearly done illegal things that warrant it. I also realize that he would never have been removed; that it would have been an entirely symbolic gesture that would have ground the congress to a halt, further politicized the nation and even introduced renewed uncertainty into the outcome of this presidential election. Symbols can be important, but I tend to prefer results.

      Dick Cheney can shoot someone in the face, and what happens? The victim goes on TV and makes a public apology. For being shot in the face.

      Sorry, but that is one of the stupidest things I have ever read on Slashdot.

      If I went hunting with somebody I had been friends with for years and got shot in the face, I damn sure wouldn't assume it was malice on my friend's part. And if some asshats tried to make political hay out of it as if it was somehow anything more than an accident, I too would defend my friend. It has nothing to do with being terrified of him or his "boss," it has to do with not being a shitty friend.

      He SHOULD feel bad that the accident that he obviously thinks nothing of turned into some sort of controversy and maligned his friend, and if he felt that calling a press conference to tell people to shut up about it would help in the least he's right to do it. I would. If you wouldn't, well, I certainly wouldn't want to be your friend.

      There are plenty of problems with Bush, Cheney, Republicans and even government in general. Let's focus on them instead of trying to invent more on stupid bases.

    16. Re:Good luck with that by rhathar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The same would have been said for segregation, women's suffrage and other civil rights, back in the day.

      --
      http://www.chaotickingdoms.com
  2. The problem isn't George W Bush by MobyDisk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is 49% of Americans don't understand what we fought for in the revolution, or in the World Wars. They thing that "fighting for freedom" means going to another country. They think freedom means more TV channels. They think it is okay for the government to ignore the constitution if there is a 1 in a billion chance it will stop another 9/11.

    "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance"
    (Unknown - attributed to Thomas Jefferson)

    1. Re:The problem isn't George W Bush by hansamurai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      49%? That's a great overestimate. I'd put it more around 4.9% of American understand those concepts.

      --
      Reviewing just the first hour of video games.
  3. Bingo! by snspdaarf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Without a suit being filed, unconstitutional laws get to stay on the books, and they get enforced.

    --
    Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
  4. Re:Noob questions by corsec67 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the telcos didn't do anything illegal,...

    Why do they want immunity? Why object to this case?

    --
    If I have nothing to hide, don't search me