Slashdot Mirror
Warrantless Wiretapping Decisions Issued By Ninth Circuit Court
sunbird writes "The Ninth Circuit yesterday issued two decisions in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's lawsuits against the National Security Agency (Jewel v. NSA) and the telecommunications companies (Hepting v. AT&T). EFF had argued in Hepting that the retroactive immunity passed by Congress was unconstitutional. The Ninth Circuit decision (PDF) upholds the immunity and the district court's dismissal of the case. Short of an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, this effectively ends the suit against the telecoms. In much better news, the same panel issued a decision (PDF) reversing the dismissal of the lawsuit against the N.S.A. and remanded the case back to the lower court for more proceedings. These cases have been previously discussed here."
Hey, why not? We already have unlimited detention without charges/evidence/probable cause. Might as well go for it all.
The NSA case will disappear in the name of national security or some such.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
Let them wiretap anything, but use ZRTP an something like this http://zfone.com/index.html. Or something even better with ECC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliptic_curve_cryptography
The court is corrupt on the face of this decision. Impeach the judges responsible.
Great. The Ninth Circuit just made it OK to use "I was just following orders" as a defense, if you're a telecom.
Law Enforcement usually wins in these sorts of cases because if you are not a criminal, then you have nothing to be concerned about.
if your life is such a big joke then why should I care?
Richard Nixon would have loved this era.
That is where it should be. That would end this nonsense of differing decisions depending on what circuit you are under.
Good or bad, make a final decision.
That a government acting against it's Constitution will have courts that uphold acting against it's Constitution.
Constitution is naught but a museum piece. We have ceased to recognize it by passing laws and court decisions that by-pass it entirely.
This BS will never stop. These got bastards want a slave society and see nothing wrong with enlisting the corporate sellouts. Best prepare yourselves for war.
Retroactive immunity later. Wonderful.
Nothing to see here:
Government instructs company to break the law. Government then gives company immunity.
What did you expect? For them to take the immunity back away?
Your rights as a citizen are only important in so far as you vote for the right guy or spend money. They could care less otherwise.
Here is my 0.02 cents: neither government nor the courts are to blame, we the citizenry who elect our officials are to blame. We have the media reporting a disporportionate amount of bad news (crime, terrorism, etc) because it sells. In turn this leads people to conclude that times are not getting safer but more dangerous and, in some cases, may actually encourage criminal copycat behaviours because of the basic human tendency to jump to conclusions. The reality is that crime hasn't really skyrocketed and by all accounts might actually be rising at a much lower rate when compared with the population. We just have a distorted perception of rampant crime and danger as a result of what the media reports. So people, and in particular senior citizens due to diminished strength and mobility, experience an irrational amount of fear. Thus we turn to our elected officials to ask for greater safety and security in the form of more laws and restrictions. Hence, many of these laws are poorly written and concieved because they were born out of a knee jerk reaction versus careful thought as to whether these laws are: (a) really necessary and/or (b) will really achieve the end result. Politicians that are wise to the demands of their constituents will of course play the get tough on crime with the hope of winning votes and even push through legislation toughening sentences or expanding the dragnet of what constitutes criminality. In summary, a vicious cycle is created that no one is really able to break unless there were a sudden breakout of common sense. I would admire the politician that would take the "not get tough on crime stance" because crime is not rampant. I would admire the politican that would take the step back and reflect the negative effects of passing some laws instead of being concerned about some short term gain in the polls. In reality, we've no one to blame but ourselves. The courts are doing what we are basically asking them. We are willingly giving up liberty for the security that we are asking for. Thomas Jefferson noted that, "Those that would give up some liberty to gain security get none and deserve neither."
Why is everyone shitting on the courts on /.? AT&T would have had MAJOR problems had they not complied with government spooks. I can't think of a single case in which corporate civil disobedience has succeeded. I think the decision with AT&T is better read in the context of the decision in Jewel v. NSA, where the court refused to let the government stifle the issue as a political generalized grievance and brought into question the relevance of the state secrets privilege. This is a Good Thing.
The government is the one with the guns here. AT&T has no interest in spying on any communications. I also agree with the above comments that it isn't unconstitutional for Congress to make something "not illegal" retroactively; if this were not a law involving a telecom corporation, no one would have issue with this.
AT&T was paid for their time. They have an interest in making money.
but it would seem to me that you would be stretching the 4th Amendment to an absurd degree to claim that the government has the right to conduct a search whenever, wherever and however they want so long as they don't actually attempt to prosecute you based on the information they obtain.
Just said that's the way it is, for better or worse.
Food for thought: The 5th Amendment says you can't be compelled to be a witness against yourself but the Government can still compel you to testify in a criminal proceeding by offering you immunity against any crimes laid bare as a result of your testimony.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Identify which members of congress voted for retroactive immunity AND is in favor of SOPA.
We should vote them out of office for trying to replace admirable American values with communist Chinese values. They should be outed as commie sympathizers and kicked out of office.
It doesn't matter whether they are Democrats, Republicans, or independents. Vote them out of office if they try to destroy what made the United States the best country in the world.
Label them as "traitors" and "commies" (even if they are just plain crooks) because the masses don't understand nuance (which is why they keep voting for people who screw them over repeatedly.)
Keep it simple, civil, and nonviolent. Participate in primaries. Vote. Look for common ground with fellow Americans regardless of gender, race, religion, abortion, guns or anything else the "commies" typically use to divide us. Don't let them divide and conquer us.
If we sit back and allow "retroactive immunity" for crimes committed by the well-connected, then we neither deserve freedom nor liberty. They've already turned us into docile slaves.
Make a pledge to do one thing daily to make yourself count. Write a hand-written letter (have it proof-read) to your representative expressing what is important to you. Remember that the quality of politicians reflect the quality & participation of citizens. Be a good citizens. Help us make the USA be #1 again in many of the things that matter. Recognize the "divide & conquer" propaganda of traitors and commies when they bring up race, religion, guns, abortion, etc. to distract us.
Are you stepping up to the plate? No?
Then, thank you, EFF, for what you've been doing. Thank you for raising the issues and at least attempting to bring about the change you want to see. The nation owes you a debt of gratitude, despite the grumbling from the A.C. above.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
Do they provide a rationale for this verdict?
The term "Lynch's Law" was used as early as 1782 by a prominent Virginian named Charles Lynch to describe his actions in suppressing a suspected Loyalist uprising in 1780 during the American Revolutionary War. The suspects were given a summary trial at an informal court; sentences handed down included whipping, property seizure, coerced pledges of allegiance, and conscription into the military. Charles Lynch's extralegal actions were retroactively legitimized by the Virginia General Assembly in 1782.
You never hear the talking heads mention echelon...
http://www.nsawatch.org/echelonfaq.html
I think not. The cost of additional wiretapping, for legitimate (non-LEO / non-security) businesses, is having a detrimental effect on profit.
Imagine if you were a high frequency trader, and the NSA's wiretapping added an extra second to the execution of each trade. The government's boys and their toys are getting in the way of business, and that would make me extremely unhappy. Like un-electing any senator giving them support. ^_^
I am John Hurt.
a.k.a. "Willful Blindness"
It is well-established law http://whitecollarcrimenews.com/2010/04/03/understanding-willful-blindness/ that you ("civilians") can be sent to prison for failing to take affirmative steps to verify that the action you were asked to take is lawful. You (and, in this case, the telecoms) don't have to do a lot of work to verify that, but in a money laundering case a failure to take any verification action whatsoever would land a civilian in prison for a long, long time.
If no telecom had bothered to request verfication of whether those warrantless wiretapping requests were lawful there might have been a reasonable defence mounted that seeing a request on FBI letterhead was reasonable verification that the order is lawful, but that went out the airlock when one telecom (Qwest) decided that it was reasonable to request verification of whether the taps were lawful orders (allegedly Qwest was severly punished for that verification attempt).
The supreme court, as thus far constituted in many different ways, doesn't understand ANY part of "no" or "shall not." Nor has the executive to date, nor congress.
Examples abound.
The problem is, the constitution has no teeth: there are no penalties for any one, or any combination, of the executive, judiciary, or congress violating the constitution's explicit directives (and their oaths as well.) None whatsoever. Furthermore, even should something (magically!? accidentally!?) be declared correctly unconstitutional, all of the harm done between the implementation of the legislation and its demise is rarely undone, compensated for, or otherwise given the attention it needs. As for the actual malfeasance, there's no provision for impeachment, reprimand, fine or imprisonment. Nothing.
Basically, the government is operating well outside its constitutionally authorized bounds, and there isn't a single thing that can be done directly about it -- from the bottom. So vote for Ron Paul -- because he can jam the process up from the top, and it appears he is more than willing to do so.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
"...they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing."
The people in the top .2% have so much power that they probably do more evil (without even noticing!) before breakfast than most psychopaths do all day!
It's totally ridiculous to tap other phones leaving theirs alone!
Plus statistics prove their all insane sociopaths, many have bunkers or remote cottages so when they blow up the world they and they alone can survive!
(Above was facetious, but true).
The Federal Court System of the United States of America is an entity of the Federal Government of the United States of America.
If the Federal Court rules so to undermine the authority of the Federal Government of the United States of America then it has by its own action underminded its own authority.
No court will rule to undermine its own authority.
The 4th Amendment is very clear (probable cause -> specific warrant -> seizure as authorized by the warrant), and so is Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution (the Supremacy Clause), which plainly states the Constitution is the highest law of the land. The 2008 FISA act blatantly contradicts both very clear articles of law by stating that the President's assurance that a directive is lawful (even if it obviously isn't) is protection from the law. If retroactive telcom immunity stands, it would potentially establish precedent that the President is the highest law of the land (again, contradictory to the Supremacy Clause.) The fact this issue had to go to appeals at all is a joke, and the retroactive immunity ruling is even more so. Plus the fact that it makes a mockery of Nuremberg, which executed people who followed unlawful orders.
One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces. - PF
No, sadly, the 2nd amendment only provides the people with weapons. If they extend that grant to implement recourse, the government will provide those same people with death, or imprisonment, loss of family, property and all rights -- and then continue on doing the same things, the same ways.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The Computer, Information and Technology Bill of Rights - the 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution 1. Information obtained for or created out of a commercial relationship is property. Any individual whose information is obtained for a commercial relationship or created out of a commercial relationship retains full ownership of that Information Property. No commercial entity shall require an individual to waive any rights to his/her Information Property. 2. There is a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy in all matters dealing with personal information, Information Property and location information when obtained by any means other than direct observation. This includes location information obtained by GPS, IP Address, Mobile Phone or any other means of ascertaining a person(s) location via personal Information Property. 3. Congress shall make no law abridging a citizens right to anonymity on the Internet as this right serves a greater democratic good than does any other good that may be achieved by forcing individuals to be numbered and named. 4. There exists a right to access the Internet only as the Internet is available to an individual, and only so far as an individual’s means and opportunity allows access. No commercial entity or individual shall be taxed to provide Internet access for another individual not including the creation and maintenance of infrastructure relating to the Internet. 5. Access to the Internet shall not be taxed. 6. Information Property shall not be seized or changed by the government. 7. Information Property shall not be taxed. 8. Information Property shall not be traded on exchanges or affixed a value by Congress, the Executive branch, the several States or commercial entities. Only by the Information Property owner or through a court of law shall the value of Information Property be determined. 9. Fair public use of an Individual’s Information Property exists and is defined as: collection, storage, and synthesis of a persons Information Property for non commercial means related to normal government functions, worthy research, or historical catalog. 10. There must exist three identifying markers before information becomes Information Property. Such as Name, Address, Telephone Number or Name, Credit Card Number, Purchase Information. One identifying marker shall be considered Information Property if it is used in such a way as to gain access to other identifying markers. 11. Governments shall make NO LAW that censors content on the Internet or restricts access to content on the Internet to persons over the age of 16 except in cases of legitimate and clear copyright infringement or impending situations of National Security. Censorship of the Internet creates a Chilling Effect on 1st Amendment rights and privileges. Censorship is best done by individuals and families. 12. No remedy shall be available to industries and/or businesses that suffer from copyright infringement when it can be proven that industries and/or businesses conspired against the market place to fix content delivery methods or price -- or sought excessive punitive damages above the actual damages done by an individual’s infringement of copyright(s). 13. Fixing, adjusting, changing hardware, firmware on owned electronic equipment is the right of the owner and shall not be waived through commercial arrangement. Fixing adjusting, changing software on owned electronic equipment is the right of the owner and shall not be waived through commercial arrangement unless fixing, adjusting, changing software is done in a fashion that adversely and maliciously affects public or government networks, systems or computers. 14. End User License Agreements and all agreements crafted to be like End User License Agreements (EULA) that are over 500 words must have a plain English equivalent of less than 500 words that accompanies the original EULA. No EULA shall contain language that unnecessarily burdens the licensee. There must exist in all End User License Agreements a parity of rights and privileges beyond the mere exchange of services and products for consideration.