Slashdot Mirror


Why DOJ Didn't Need a "Super Search Warrant" To Snoop On Fox News' E-mail

awaissoft writes "If attorney general Eric Holder wanted to perform even a momentary Internet wiretap on Fox News' e-mail accounts, he would have had to persuade a judge to approve what lawyers call a 'super search warrant.' A super search warrant's requirements are exacting: Intercepted communications must be secured and placed under seal. Real-time interception must be done only as a last resort. Only certain crimes qualify for this technique, the target must be notified, and additional restrictions apply to state and local police conducting real-time intercepts. But because of the way federal law was written nearly half a century ago, Holder was able to obtain a normal search warrant — lacking those extensive privacy protections — that allowed federal agents to secretly obtain up to six years of email correspondence between Fox News correspondent James Rosen and his alleged sources."

10 of 330 comments (clear)

  1. Re:There you have it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Leftist here. It's not OK because its Fox and it's not OK because Obama did it. And FYI I'm sure the government would have also engaged in unconstitutional wire tapping were Romney (or Paul, or [Insert your favorite controlled opposition candidate here]).
    Your problem might be that you have mistaken Democrats for actual leftists.

  2. Not OK No Matter What. by kms_one · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't let the Red/Blue Faux News debate cloud this issue. It doesn't matter who did it or to whom it is not okay and this policy should be banned.

  3. Re: Not News to Fox by hsmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not shocking this is flagged informative by the left leaning slashdot. Gotta circle the troops around the commander and chief. God forbid he is worse than GWB, which is a feat in itself no one could have imagined.
    An administration spying on journalists and using the IRS as a political tool is chilling as fuck and every single American ought to be scared as shit of it. Oh wait, you voted for him? Makes it ok I guess!

  4. Re:What did Fox News do? by mysidia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not what they did; it's what the person talking to them was allegedly doing. The Executive branch was investigating a leak from one of its own, and Fox News was on the receiving end of the information, apparently, so by wiretapping Fox News' communications, they were hoping to find the source of the leak.

    This is exactly the kind of activity that is supposed to be prohibited by the 1st amendment; attempting to force the press (covertly or not) to reveal the identity of their sources.

  5. Blame game by psherman2001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doesn't matter who's fault it is...
    who started privacy abuses,
    what party is/was in power.


    There is something going terribly wrong here.

    We, as Americans,
    have obviously slid quite a little way down the slippery slope,
    toward something quite different than the bastion of freedom we like to think of ourselves as...

    We should be doing something more about it than pointing fingers and playing politics.

  6. Re:There you have it by tsotha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fast & Furious is a major scandal. It's perfectly reasonable for Fox to treat it as such.

  7. Re: Not News to Fox by amiga3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Especially as the PFC actually raised his right hand and swore to be a good and obedient soldier. His was an act of treason whereas reporters are generally depended upon to be all about the story they are after. This is Fox News though. A lot of the left hates them enough to not mind if the administration they worship pisses all over the First Amendment. I noticed most of the leftist media though wasn't so happy about it however. They, unlike the liberals here, are smart enough to realize that one day there might be another Republican administration (I doubt it but I guess it could happen) and they don't like the precedent this sets. To me this is just another sign that using e-mail is not a good idea. If I was in the news business I'd start raising pigeons.

  8. Re: What did Fox News do? by Totenglocke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except Nixon was a saint compared to Obama.

    --
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
  9. Re:Not News to Fox by kermidge · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The simple solution is to fold email into current law so as to enjoy the same protections as snail mail.

  10. Re:There you have it by darkmeridian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    LOL, no, if you voted for Romney the government would have engaged in unconstitutional wiretapping anyway. Everyone wants to expand government powers when they're in charge then rein them back when they aren't.

    My problem with Fox News and their supporters is their embarrassing inconsistencies on this issue. Roger Ailes said in 1988 that leakers should be tortured and executed, and Fox News personalities have consistently declared war against Bradley Manning, Julian Assange, and Wikileaks because they weren't real news organizations. It's the leftists who defended Bradley Manning and also Fox News. Just read everyone who supports Fox News. Even the New York Times got Fox News' back: "With the decision to label a Fox News television reporter a possible ''co-conspirator'' in a criminal investigation of a news leak, the Obama administration has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news." So not only are you wrong about the right, you're also wrong about the left. I guess you must be a GOP.

    And about the IRS scandal. Remember when four Republican congressmen asked (and received) a three year IRS probe into the NAACP for saying bad things about President Bush? LOL.

    Seriously, the GOP and its supporters should adopt a worldview that's at least internally consistent. The leftists do a better job of it than the right. The GOP argues that we should preserve the Constitution then argues that we should strip American citizens of their Constitutional rights because they were accused of being a bomber. PLEASE THINK BEFORE YOU SPEAK!

    --
    A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/