Supreme Court Disallows FISA Challenges
New submitter ThatsNotPudding writes "The U.S. Supreme court has rejected pleas to allow any challenges to the FISA wiretapping law unless someone can prove they've been harmed by it. 'The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, was originally designed to allow spying on the communications of foreign powers. But after the September 11 attacks, FISA courts were authorized to target a wide array of international communications, including communications between Americans and foreigners. ... In this case, the plaintiffs' groups said their communications were likely being scooped up by the government's expanded spying powers in violation of their constitutional rights. Today's decision, a 5-4 vote along ideological lines by the nation's highest court, definitively ends their case. In an opinion (PDF) by Justice Samuel Alito, the court ruled that these groups don't have the right to sue at all, because they can't prove they were being spied on.'"
Further coverage at SCOTUSblog.
Attack from a different direction. They'll probably shoot that down too, but play the game. Attack, attack, attack until something works.
I guess if you found yourself in Gitmo you could prove you were harmed.
If you could ever get in front of a judge.
Oh well.
You can't just sue over the constitutionality of a law, you still need to have standing which based on the result of this case the majority believes they lack.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
If you must be harmed by it to complain, then the only test cases would come from terrorists, thus the "people" would either have to root for draconian government or terrorists. That will let the judges officially allow it against those with standing to sue, not enough will be annoyed to end the tyranny of the government. Note, it allows for people to sue, they just must have proof they were harmed, and only someone arrested after government spying will have a case. Any other attempts (FOIA and such) will be met with "national security" defense, which is still iron clad.
Learn to love Alaska
I am afraid you got the last line wrong.
Gov: We spy on Americans in secret.
Me: Stop spying on me
Gov: You can't prove that we did
Gov: *middle finger*
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
Hopefully the President will still get the chance to appoint more progressives to the Supreme Court to protect us from his policies.
The court is part of the government. Do not expect them to uphold our rights.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
But to prove your rights were violated by a FISA investigation is impossible under the grounds of national security. Catch 22 writ large enough for anyone to see.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
Are you of the opinion that the Democratic party is not conservative? Obama is far to the right of even Richard Nixon, there aren't more than a handful of congresscritters who would qualify as 'liberal'.
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
Repubmocrat Tyranny
"Today's decision, a 5-4 vote along ideological lines by the nation's highest court, definitively ends their case."
"In an opinion by Justice Samuel Alito ... The majority opinion was joined by Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Anthony Kennedy, as well as Chief Justice John Roberts ... [Breyer] is joined in a dissent by Justices Ruth Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan."
False equivalence is false.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
What our fine Judge Alito said is it is ok to trespass, just don't get caught. Ok, it is a bit more complicated than that.
Example. A neighbor sneaks in to Judge Alito's unlocked home. Judge cannot prosecute the neighbor's trespass, because Judge Alito cannot prove the neighbor had trespassed because it is legal to trespass secretly. Even though the neighbor has records to each and every trespassing, the records seem to be off limits as well.
That is effed up.
Absurd.
The insignificant fleas that ride on the back of the state are just that: tiny. To understand reality, one must understand its rules, the relevant one to this discussion being the axiom of identity. Blaming those with no armies, no courts, no bombs, no police, no jails, and no permission from the ruled is a sort of blindness that can only be the result of a lifetime of propaganda and cultural pressure. This is big brother in its full glory. Not in plain view and direct, but so infused with society that there are actually people who would condemn benefactors of this violent intrusion rather than the violent actor.
To even mention things like the 'Koch brothers' in the face of such an enormous monstrosity like the state is an admission of psychological defense. It would be like blaming the shop keeper who pays off the local mafia to keep himself safe, or blaming the more sinister man who bribes them to kill a competitor. These actions are an effect of the violence that infests such a community, not the cause. To understand the world, one must call things by their proper name; the actor responsible for waving guns around, terrorizing innocent people is the one responsible for the evil. The state, like the mafia, is the institution that contains this group of actors.
the USA is utterly doomed.
It is in its death spiral.
Just bought a new quantum computer, but I'm uncertain how it works.
As much as I think Ayn Rand was a total hypocrite and a whackjob this is the ONE thing she got right, there are so many laws on the books now that frankly we are ALL criminals and at any time, for any slight, they can throw you in prison for as many years as they like simply because the laws are such a minefield now that just by breathing you are probably violating a dozen statutes.
I mean for the love of God we have no less than 2 people in prison even as we speak for thoughtcrimes folks, how much more proof do you need that Orwell got the time a little off but otherwise was right on the money? You have the guy who wrote the "pro pedo" book, he wasn't charged with actually DOING anything, just putting his thoughts on the subject in book form, and the second was a guy that was told by his therapist to write his fantasies about sleeping with underage girls down so they could discuss them in therapy. Again he didn't actually DO anything, he just put his thoughts on paper.
This is why I have always tried to support the ACLU and speak up, just as my grandfather taught me when he spoke up in support of the right of the Illinois Nazis to march even though Nazis dropped a wall on him and his squad at the end of WWII and he spent 2 years in a full body cast, its because you HAVE to support those with the unpopular cases because THOSE are how they get these bad laws rammed down our throats. Pedos, terrorists, racists, they use these as bogeymen precisely because they know how few will speak up for fear of looking like they support their views. Here is a perfect example, a law they ran through after the tragedy of 9/11 under the guise of "We must make sure it never happens again!" but government NEVER gets smaller or weaker, only bigger and more powerful, so now we are seeing these laws used as a blank check to spy on anybody that looks at them funny.
But its NOT the weapons training that makes the fascists fear the vet, its the fact that those who have suffered for their freedoms are the ones who covet it most dearly. As I said if anybody had a reason to hate Nazis it was my grandfather, the stories of what he went through, of having the PAK 88 used upon them, of seeing bodies blown to bits, yet he was the first to step up and tell all those around him "They deserve the right to speak, no matter what we feel about their speech they have the right to be heard" and THAT is what scares the fascist, the fact that the vets won't kowtow and will stand up and point out their lies.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.