Slashdot Mirror


Utah Considers Warrantless Internet Subpoenas

seneces writes "The Utah State Legislature is considering a bill granting the Attorney General's Office the ability to demand customer information from Internet or cell phone companies via an administrative subpoena, with no judicial review (text of the HB150). This represents an expansion of a law passed last year, which granted that ability when 'it is suspected that a child-sex crime has been committed.' Since becoming law, last year's bill has led to more than one non-judicial request per day for subscriber information. Pete Ashdown, owner of a local ISP and 2006 candidate for the US Senate, has discussed his position and the effects of this bill."

10 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. And now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a case study in why you can't pass exceptional legislation aimed at exceptional crimes. Just because a crime is particularly repugnant does not mean that we should lay down our rights to try and stop it. Don't be so lazy, find a better solution.

    1. Re:And now by TheLink · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Laws should not be passed just based on how they are to be used.

      They should be passed based on how they can be abused. If there are too many ways they can be abused (or if the impact of abuse is high), they should not be passed.

      --
  2. Re:Yes, they are thinking of the children by hedwards · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Eh, you must be knew here. That's how fascism works. You trick people into voting for these sorts of morons by scaring the crap out of them by theoreticals and what ifs. Then you do whatever you need to to do to take their rights.

  3. Apparently Constitution doesn't apply in Utah by HangingChad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ..the ability to demand customer information from Internet or cell phone companies via an administrative subpoena, with no judicial review (text of the HB150).

    I don't get it. Isn't Utah the home of a lot of those militant constitutional crusaders? So giving health care coverage to poor people and making people have health insurance to cut out the freeloaders in the health care system is socialism and unconstitutional, but law enforcement reviewing GPS cellphone data and their ISP logs without a warrant is all okay? You want the government out of our lives...unless it's abortion or right to die, then government intervention is okay.

    How do you rationalize positions like that?

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re:Apparently Constitution doesn't apply in Utah by Attack+DAWWG · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Rationalize?

      These are the "Get yer gummint hands off my Medicare!" types. These are the ones who scream all day long about states' rights, and then yell for the federal government to do something when other states legalize medical marijuana or gay marriage.

      And you want rationalization?

  4. Oh, won't you think of the children? by SimonInOz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Child sex crime is horrible.

    No argument there. I have children. The mere idea indeed, horrifies me.

    But I am dismayed to see such crimes being used as leverage to obtain ever more far-reaching powers.

    There is no question that "all power corrupts". It's not a standard quote for nothing - it is, all too sadly, true.
    I believe that no special powers are needed here - just sensible application of the ones that the already specially privileged police forces already have, is sufficient. I see no realistic problem with getting a search warrant from a judge. Like for searching a house.

    Suspicion indeed - I'd like to feel the police would need a little more than suspicion - suspicion with enough basisi to convince a judge, perhaps? Isn't that what they are for, as a counterbalance to "over zealous" police forces?

    After all, anybody can suspect anybody of anything - with no basis whatsoever. And I don't think that's a good basis for a law. It's more like a license to harass, I'd say. And isn't there already enough of that?

    --
    "Cats like plain crisps"
    1. Re:Oh, won't you think of the children? by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is no question that "all power corrupts".

      Actually, to my mind there is a question. I don't believe power corrupts, I believe power attracts the corruptible. The fact that there are a few good cops and good politicians kind of illustrates that; but people go for those jobs because they're power hungry.

  5. Re:I'm no lawyer but.. by houghi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How I wish that my sig was only a joke.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  6. Re:I'm no lawyer but.. by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >>>Under the Patriot Act, FBI agents may issue National Security Letters to obtain comprehensive financial and communications records about anyone, including people suspected of no wrongdoing and no connection to terrorists or foreign powers. To do this, the FBI merely needs to claim the information is relevant to an investigation
    >>>

    This is why we can no longer depend upon the U.S. Supreme Court. They've had almost ten years to nullify this unconstitutional law and have not done so. Therefore I propose this:

    The "Protect the 9th and 10th Amendments" Act.
    ----- Proposed Amendment XXVIII.
    Section 1. After a Bill has become Law, if one-half of the States declare the Law to be "unconstitutional" it shall be null and void. It shall be as if the Law never existed. ----- Section 2. This article shall be inoperative, unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths* of the several States by the date January 1, 2050.

    With this amendment, there'd be no need to wait for the 9 old people on the court. You (and your neighbors) could collectively instruct the State Legislature to declare the law "unconstitutional". Once 25 other legislatures have done the same, then the U.S. law would be voided, and there's be no more Patriot Act.

    My proposed amendment would simplify the process, shorten the time that an unconstitutional law sits on the books (2-3 years, not decades), and most-importantly, not require citizens to sit in jail or otherwise be spied upon.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  7. Re: Child abuse is the new Godwin. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Exactly, and just as I predicted. Child abuse and kiddie porn should be added as a clause to Godwin's law when it comes to legislative discussions: sooner or later someone is going to bring up "The Children" to defend their side of the argument.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...