Slashdot Mirror
EFF Wins Release of Secret Court Opinion: NSA Surveillance Unconstitutional
mspohr writes "For over a year, EFF has been fighting the government in federal court to force the public release of an 86-page opinion of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). Issued in October 2011, the secret court's opinion found that surveillance conducted by the NSA under the FISA Amendments Act was unconstitutional and violated 'the spirit of' federal law."
Shut it down......Shut it all down NOW!!!
You at the other side of the pond have generated a farce beyond fantasy. Create secret court, abuse powers, secret court says "non", ignore, expand and repeat.
As a tech I'd say your system has found a resonance point where the loop-gain is so much greater than one that it might cause the earth's rotation to change....
The documents showed that the problems were relatively small when compared with the vast scale of N.S.A. surveillance conducted from the United States on noncitizens abroad. The ruling estimated that the agency intercepts more than 250 million communications that way each year. And the N.S.A. fixed the problems to the courtâ(TM)s satisfaction, the documents showed.
Interesting...
Free Martian Whores!
So they got a court opinion that said it was unconstitutional, yet they just ignored it. Someone must be accountable for that! Aren't all US federal officers sworn to uphold the constitution of the United States of America - all the way up to the president? At the very least, someone should be tried for contempt of court. No matter the justification and possible reasons for the NSA program, they can't just ignore the highest law of the land. Or can they? It is a very slippery slope.
Meus subcriptio est nocens Latin quoniam bardus populus reputo is sanus callidus
But the documents also revealed further problems. In particular, Judge Bates portrayed the issue, which the N.S.A. had brought to the secret surveillance courtâ(TM)s attention after discovering that it had been happening for several years, as part of a broader pattern of misleading the oversight court about its domestic spying activities.
âoeThe Court is troubled that the governmentâ(TM)s revelations regarding N.S.A.â(TM)s acquisition of Internet transactions mark the third instance in less than three years in which the government has disclosed a substantial misrepresentation regarding the scope of a major collection program,â he wrote.
There need to be penalties. Someone should be brought up on charges.
Free Martian Whores!
They'll be put on Double Secret Probation.
How about we impeach brain dead idiots like yourself? I'm not a fan of Obama at this point, but this isn't all on him. Your boyscout Bush, and both major political parties have deep rooted ties to all of this shit.
How exactly does it get out of the FISA court into the Supreme Court and would Roberts have to recuse himself because he appointed most of the FISA judges?
Time for more popcorn.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
The same way he "hasn't" been all along. When the lies are coming from the highest levels of the government, they can brand anybody they want as anything they like. One can only hope that the EFF is large and influential enough to cope with any fallout from this.
Looks like it might be time to donate again. There's something ridiculous about the need to buy decent government by donating to a charitable organization, but hey, they're doing better than most, and most of "us" (Slashdot readers) can probably afford it. Normally I'd suggest the option of doing it by way of the Humble Bundle, but currently they don't include that option...
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
Who's going to impeach him? Congress and the Senate are complicit in this, and they're the ones who have to impeach. Remember, they don't give two shits about the constitution or they'd never had passed the Bono Act or the PATRIOT Act.
Lets impeach congress next election. I want my country back.
Free Martian Whores!
Fact: Obama was more responsible for Katrina response than Bush:
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/poll-louisiana-gopers-unsure-if-katrina-response-was
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
This is legitimate prejudice for starting a revolution.
Your government and leading class has to learn how democracy gets done.
Everyone shall have this very definition of democracy hardwired in their brains for the centuries to come.
The evil doers will have to admit it painfully for best results, fear has to change sides.
The world is watching you USA.
People just like blaming Obama for apparatus that was setup under Bush's watch. That been he Repub's MO since they lost the election before the last.
Before you all get whipped in to a frenzy: Consider that Obama (Or rather his entire administration) gets his information from the NSA. That's their job. That's how the system works. Do you think that the NSA is going to supply him information that makes them look like out of control corrupt goons? Are they going to say "Hi Mr.President. We wiped our ass with the Constitution 548 times last month" No. They're going to portray their operation in a positive light, and insist that they are legally doing everything necessary to keep America safe.
Recent information says, though, that the situation is bad. Their secret courts make them immune to oversight. We all know this is bad, but realistically it's very political problem that's going to to take a long time to fix. You all should know how long it will take to dig out an entrenched government institution, let alone one with near unlimited power and a secret budget.
Whenever these stories come out, I am uncomfortably reminded of conservative constitution-worship. "As the nation teeters at the edge of fiscal chaos, observers are reaching the conclusion that the American system of government is broken. But almost no one blames the culprit: our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions."
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
People just like blaming Obama for apparatus that was setup under Bush's watch.
Well, if Obama ever wants to change that impression, he can start by firing people involved in unconstitutional activities.
Don't worry, they didn't actually violate a law. It was the 'spirit' of the law that was violated.
Move along people, nothing to see here.
Let me try to predict your reply:
Wah Wah Bush is a war criminal don't bully Obama you stupid republican piece of shit!
Don't give me that fucking garbage, shove your partisan bullshit right up your ass.
No, this is on him. Hes in the 2nd term of precidency. Its on him. He might not have started it, but he has the power to stop it, and instead chose to keep it going. Just like our occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan, just like GITMO, just like the promised end of DEA raids on legal dispensaries. Spying got worse, still in Iraq and Afghanistan, GITMO still is open, DEA raids have gotten worse. The blame is justifiably on him.
I'm not a fan of Obama at this point, but this isn't all on him.
Yes it is all on him.
He could have ended this with one stroke of the pen. He's had 6 years. How many time does he have to get re-elected before he owns this mess?
How many times do you intend to repeat that soggy old mantra of it being Bush's fault?
He could have gone public, shut it all down with an executive order. Instead He lied. Then he lied about lying. Now he welcomes a "dialog" where in he will tell us polity and sympathetically to shut up, sit down, and watch tv like good little kids.
And useful idiots like you will lap it all up again just like you did the first time and the second time.
You lapped it up when he closed the embassies because of huge terror plots.
You just keep buying the same sack of horseshit over and over again.
You tell me: What will it take!???
When do you stop defending him?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Agreed.
However, the problem I have with a lot of Obama critics is not that the content of their criticism is actually wrong, but rather feels disingenuous. Had Mitt won the presidency, I feel like a lot of these guys bitching about Obama would be standing right in line behind Mitt, who I believe would be doing basically the exact same thing as Obama*, charging that anyone who dared criticize that "great patriot Mitt Romney" was a terrorist-sympathizing traitor who should be rounded up and executed. I don't see Mitt having a fundamentally different stance on NSA wiretapping, the Patriot Act, or drone strikes (and I bet Benghazi would still have happened under his watch, too).
For those of you (us) who have managed to remain consistent with our criticisms of both parties, bravo.
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
People just like blaming Obama for apparatus that was setup under Bush's watch.
Oh, come on, this is not his first month in the Oval Office. People blame Obama for expanding on the apparatus established under Bush (and he did so quite actively).
When does he become responsible, anyway? After he leaves the office at the end of 8 years? It must be DURING his tenure as a president, and that's more than half over.
Do you think that the NSA is going to supply him information that makes them look like out of control corrupt goons?
No, but it'd be nice if he responded once the information comes to light. Ignoring incriminating revelations is same as supporting them.
Nixon wasn't so bad. At least he had enough respect for the law and the citizens to break in at night. The NSA does it in broad daylight, and whenever confronted, they just give another explanation of why it is okay.
Also, while I won't share who I voted for (immaterial, and really, what's the point of a secret ballot if you tell everyone who you voted for?), I will say that when Obama was elected, I went along with it. People said "oh, he's going to bring Chicago rough-and-tumble bullying politics into the Presidency!" and I was thinking "Good!" Maybe Chicago style politics would have gotten us out of Iraq and Afghanistan sooner. Maybe Chicago-style politics would have closed Guantanomo, or repealed the Patriot Act. I'd love to see some of these career politicians dragged out by their proverbial short-and-curlies in front of everyone and dressed down for their selling-out-of-america. But no, we got just another Washington style politician, bought and paid for by moneyed interests.
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
Nixon wasn't so bad. At least he had enough respect for the law and the citizens to break in at night.
And enough sense of shame to resign. The more recent politicians are quite literally shameless.
People just like blaming Obama for apparatus that was setup under Bush's watch.
How about blaming him for criticizing that apparatus during his campaign, promising to dismantle it, and then embracing and expanding it all after he was elected.
Getting really tired of the It's Okay When My Side Does It crowd.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
To quote one of my favorite movie characters, "The shit is about to hit the fan and I want to be here to see it." (Dr. Lazarus in "Outland" in case you're curious.)
The publication of this court ruling is going to make it much easier for a federal judge and subsequent appellate judges to slam the NSA down hard. I'm not certain about the law on this but it might also make it possible to send certain NSA officials to prison. My prediction: Heads at the NSA are about to roll and I will not be surprised if one of them is Gen. Alexander. Because he is a serving general and this shit happened on active duty, he could be courtmartialed, be stripped of rank, and lose his pension, a just punishment I believe for such a grave violation of the people's civil rights.
Unfortunately, the heads will not be literally be rolling on the floor, and perhaps that's a good thing. It's nice to contemplate, however. It would have made one hell of a great game of pool on a diabolical billiard table. General Alexander's head would be the cue ball. Some people more evil than myself might possess the belief that a certain other person's head should be the 8-ball but I'm not one of them. But it's hilarious to visualize!
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
The last scary thought I shall leave with. What if J Edgar Hoover had the NSA's ability to spy on people?
I'm not sure why you're assuming that Robert Mueller is any better. Maybe because he's better at secrecy and intimidation? Think about this for a minute: After Hoover's death, when all the stuff he did came out, Congress passed a law limiting the term of any FBI director to 10 years. Yet, recently, the law was ignored and Mueller's term extended Why? Well the excuse was that it was required for "continuity", but, is that really credible coming from a Democratically-controlled Senate debating the illegal extension of term for a Bush appointee. How?
During one of the recent hearings on spying, Holder was asked if the NSA was also tapping into private phone calls and emails of members of Congress. He basically refused to answer the question, offering to "address that in a different forum." In secret, in other words. And one NSA whistle blower mentioned how the program even targeted a certain senate candidate from Illinois (yep, that one).
So we may now be in an even worse position, with a J. Edgar Hoover type leading the FBI, and with much better technology and a greatly expanded police and surveillance state.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
People just like blaming Obama for apparatus that was setup under Bush's watch. That been he Repub's MO since they lost the election before the last.
If you are President, especially for 5 years heading towards 8, and it is still going on during your administration under leadership you appointed, you own it. That includes even programs that started before you came into power.
If you disagree with that, maybe you can tell us when it will be appropriate to hold President Obama responsible for events occurring during his administration? Will that be the day after he leaves office?
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
We're never getting off this planet, are we?
Fuck.
Donate to the EFF right now. Do not wait. Donate this very minute.
You've just arrived on the internet, and you've never heard of Predator, or Echelon, of any other data gathering programs and softwares.
Well, since you are so new here, your ignorance can be forgiven. Prism is just the latest version of data mining programs. And, Prism isn't the only program. A number of articles have suggested that Prism is just one of the many facets of NSA spying.
It is GOVERNMENT that is at fault here. It isn't one administration - it is GOVERNMENT. Our government is so damned big, even congress has little idea what any part of government is doing. Only after Snowden forced Prism into the spotlight did members of congress begin to demand answers. Normally, the intelligence network is "monitored" by a select committee of congress critters, who generally don't report much of anything back to the main body of congress.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
You are mistaken. For example, I very publicly called out my Congressman for failing to support the amendment to end this shit. That's a Republican congressman whom I voted for. Then, I made sure that for two weeks his Facebook page featured me blasting his excuses for not doing something about this.
On this very page, I've called Bush, who I voted for based on his success as governor, "one of the worst presidents in history".
There are two ways you can support your "team". You can either support them in becoming the best, doing the best, or you can mindlessly pretend whatever they do is best. If my football team has a crappy quarterback, I say it. I say "let's figure out what we need in a replacement QB". Pretending that your QB is awesome as he fumbles every snap doesn't get you anywhere. All it does is make youlook stupid and your team continue to lose. The Democrats made a bad draft pick. The sooner they admit that the sooner they can improve.
That wasn't a sense of shame, that was a sense of better-make-a-deal-to-avoid-prosecution.
This space intentionally left blank
People just like blaming Obama for apparatus that was setup under Bush's watch.
No. People like blaming Obama for not doing anything about the apparatus that was setup under Bush's watch, and for not doing what he said he would do. We blamed Bush when he was in office, now he isn't. So we blame the person who is in charge, who isn't doing anything to fix the situation.
Why do you think there's such a push for drones and bots?
But at least back then there was a threat of prosecution.
The thing that makes Obama different than Bush is that Obama promised stuff like protection for whistleblowers and attacked the NSA's wiretapping.
Candidate Obama said that The Bush administration puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide.
That is quite different than what President Obama is saying now.
This is very much like George Bush Sr.'s "Read my lips: no new taxes" line.
Nowhere did Candidate Bush nor President Bush vow to end illegal wiretapping. But Obama did.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
I'm afraid that I'm old enough to remember campaigning against Nixon, and wearing "I voted for McGovern" buttons as Nixon's behavior became more criminal and more power mad.. His resignation wasn't due to "sense of shame". His resignation prevented impeachment, and the immediate pardon after his resignation prevented criminal prosecution after his resignation.
The situation is not very comparable: enough personally criminal behavior, rather than unconstitutional policy, was exposed to leave Richard Nixon open to personal prosecution as soon as he lost his sovereign immunity. The NSA's behavior has been much more difficult to expose as individuals doing criminal acts.
I'm afraid that the President does have this kind of power. The behavior of the NSA is a matter of policy. The President and his officers present the budgets for the NSA to Congress, and set the policies that are not a matter of already existing law. NSA practices like the monitoring of domestic, civilian communications with the excuse that it had a "50% or better chance of involving foreign communications" is a matter of policy, not law. And the policy for Guantanamo Bay prisoners to lack legal representation, for the names to be kept secret, and to review the cases of only those whom allied governments discover and raise concerns about, are all in the President's hands.
I'm afraid that Mr. Obama tries to seek consensus, full agreement from all concerned, in cases like these where a clear moral stance would show leadership and earn far more respect for his most important goals, such as health care plans or economic recovery work. It's left America without the much promised "change"" of his first campaign.
Parent post speaks the truth.
Fact: Obama has come out swinging in support of the surveillance programs. He should be held responsible for it.
Also fact: Politicians from both parties, GOP and Dems created and voted in the laws that allowed the surveillance programs. They supported the surveillance programs and continue to support it. They should also be held accountable for it.
My point is that Obama is just a figurehead. Don't focus all your anger on him and lose sight of the fact that there is a whole bunch of politicians of all stripes behind him cheering him on. Im sure they would love it if you scapegoat Obama and let them walk free.
Exactly. People that blame D or R are just continuing the fiction that there is any significant difference.
Bush was upfront about his support for these programs. Obama specifically ran against them, but defends them publically now.
In any case, today Obama's the boss - it's his ship to steer, and we should blame him for the course he sets, even if previous leaders are bad too. Gah, if there's one thing I hate at work, it's people who say "yes, this sucks, and we could fix it easily, but we're used to the pain so just deal with it".
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
That's not the "result of ageneral political consensus among the President and Congress that allowing terrorists to kill large numbers of American citizens is a bad thing."
It was a huge power grab and has done nothing to improve American safety.
It *has* significantly eroded our constitution.
And yes, some of us question the gross increase in executive power and public surveillance in return for an undemonstrated and unrealized threat.
If any significant plot had been prevented we could have a public debate on the merits, but no such plot has ever been brought to the table. We're supposed to just trust them, and with the current administration and prior adminstrations' track records!
They can go fuck themselves.
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION, Plaintiff.
versus
NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, Defendant.
[Redacted] [redacted] of the [redacted]. [Redacted] [redacted] and [100 pages of completely blacked out text].
We rule, therefore that [redacted] [redacted] [redacted].
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
I just want to make sure I have the right series of events here, from the public perspective:
1. A previous elected official and congress enact some overreaching laws in response to a terrorist attack
2. A politician who makes a bunch of promises against these programs is elected the new President
3. The now-elected politician strengthens and enforces those programs rather than shuttering them
4. There is some kind of a court decision but it is sealed/secret. FOIA requests are made by EFF.
5. A whistle blower comes forward and exposes the illegal activities to the public because his bosses and the elected official have continued said operations. Since his bosses are the Executive Branch and responsible for enforcing the law, he has nobody to report his findings to other than the public.
6. The elected official and members of congress declare said whistle blower a traitor for exposing their methods.
7. It is revealed that the court had previously, as in years ago, ruled that the activities reported on by the whistle blower are illegal. Meaning the whistle blower is not just reporting the activities, but he is reporting that the President of the United States, the heads of major departments, the Attorney General, and a bunch of other People In Power have been knowingly breaking the law to empower the government. Not only, in fact, are they doing something that the court already ruled is illegal, but they sealed the court's decision so that the public would not know about it.
Did I miss anything?
Oh yeah,
8. Snowden is probably still fucked.
The various terror groups know Obama is full of hot air and does not follow up on attacks.
I'm sure that Osama bin Laden agrees, as do the targets of all those drone strikes.
The Syrian army crossed the red line again and nothing from Barry.
The 15-minute response you seem to be asking for with regard to Syria would be about the only action that might be considered even less civilised than gassing your own civilians. Is that really what you'd like to see?
This is not some film where you hear someone shout, "Do something!" then see 30 seconds of Barry sweating as he slowly but surely remembers and inputs the Abort code that stops the timer and keeps Dr Madguy's giant laser from lighting up and cooking Los Angeles.
I've got a brilliant idea: Let's impeach Obama and replace him with you.
This is a complex scenario with a great many players--Israel, Lebanon/Hezbollah, Turkey/NATO/EU, Iraq/Kurdistan, and Russia, amongst others--having an interest in the outcome of a civil war between the militarist fascists who've held power for decades and the militant religious whackos that seek to take their place. You've also got the UN and the norms of international law to consider. At home you've got legislators to keep happy, and there is a good chance that, no matter what your response is, at least some of them will take issue with it--and of these, some of them will be doing so merely to score points against you in the media, regardless of what might really be best for the US (or for the Syrians, for that matter).
What do you propose to do, Mr President? Go ahead--the whole world is watching and waiting.
Isn't this fun?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.