Wiretap Requests From Federal and State Authorities Fell 14% In 2011

coondoggie writes "Federal and state court orders approving the interception of wire, oral or electronic communications dropped 14% in 2011, compared to the number reported in 2010. According to a report issued by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts a total of 2,732 wiretap applications were authorized in 2011 by federal and state courts, with 792 applications by federal authorities and 1,940 applications by 25 states that provide reports. The reduction in wiretaps resulted primarily from a drop in applications for intercepts in narcotics offenses, the report noted."

Comments

This doesn't mean the amount of wiretaps have drop

[Anonymous Coward]

Only that the ones done legally have dropped. I'm sure the total amount of wiretapping has gone up.

CarrierIQ and the like have made taps obsolete.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why muck around with asking for permission when the phone companies are more than happy to preinstall malware for you and be very cooperative as long as you don't mess with their business?

So?

[Thaelon]

Did they do it less, or stop asking for permission?

[Citation needed]

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the sort of accusation that requires proof.

Re:[Citation needed]

[poetmatt]

clarification: 8500/140k NSL's which can include wiretaps, 2700 NSL's before - but we're talking about 2700 *wiretaps* at the moment. That shows that the gov't has clearly moved in favor of NSL's.

Re:Except you can't do that

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think the government will just ignore the law and do whatever it wants anyway, then any discussion of the law is moot.

Except that we aren't talking about what's legal, we're talking about the actions that law enforcement are taking. If they are ignoring the law then it is entirely relevant to the point of conversation about how many wiretappings are actually taking place.

Before the NSA data center opens?!

[guttentag]

Wow! And the new NSA data center that's-so-big-the-town-they're-building-it-in-had-to-expand-its-boundaries in Utah isn't even online yet! Just imagine how infrequently they'll need to bother the courts after it opens next year. Eventually judges may be able to go back to their original mission of hearing cases, unmolested by the petty need to approve wiretaps.

Re:Except you can't do that

[PopeRatzo]

The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 clearly specifies that an properly adjudicated, individualized warrant from a court is required to collect, process, analyze, store, or disseminate the content of the communications of a US Person.

And law enforcement says, "Who cares?"

If you think the government will just ignore the law and do whatever it wants anyway, then any discussion of the law is moot.

Any discussion of the law is moot.

Come on, a show of hands: Who believes that surveillance of communications has gone down in any year since 2001?

Those of you with your hands up are delusional.

Re:So...

[houghi]

Or perhaps it is that they don;t have time to watch the criminals, because they are listening in so much more into not-yet criminals.