Slashdot Mirror
Judge: NSA Phone Program Likely Unconstitutional
schwit1 writes in with the latest on an U.S. District Court ruling over NSA spying. "A federal judge ruled Monday that the National Security Agency's phone surveillance program is likely unconstitutional, Politico reports. U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon said that the agency's controversial program, first unveiled by former government contractor Edward Snowden earlier this year, appears to violate the Constitution's Fourth Amendment, which states that the 'right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.' 'I cannot imagine a more "indiscriminate" and "arbitrary invasion" than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying it and analyzing it without judicial approval,' Leon wrote in the ruling. The federal ruling came down after activist Larry Klayman filed a lawsuit in June over the program. The suit claimed that the NSA's surveillance 'violates the U.S. Constitution and also federal laws, including, but not limited to, the outrageous breach of privacy, freedom of speech, freedom of association, and the due process rights of American citizens.'"
Now the NSA will appeal. Off to the Supreme Court it goes. About fucking time. It is time to enforce the fourth amendment. I hope there are many more fourth amendment challenges in the pipeline. The bill of rights is the only thing left to save us from government tyranny.
So long Mr. Leon, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
"That's nice."
-NSA Press Secretary
FTA: He said was staying his ruling pending appeal "in light of the significant national security interests at stake in this case and the novelty of the constitutional issues."
Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
"NSA decides it doesn't care what the constitution says and keeps on doing what it wants."
The Generation
I'd say something witty here, but I'm not that bright.
And also that Edward Snowden was a cheater!
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
At least try to find an 'original' source and not just a news sausage maker.
Oh wait, he appointed Leon... Now I don't know who to hate, maybe it will just have to be the whole government!
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
"But in his a 68-page, heavily footnoted opinion, Leon concluded that the government didn't cite a single instance in which the program 'actually stopped an imminent terrorist attack.'"'
Who wants to bet there'd be a false flag coming soon, that the gov't miraculously stops via this very program? Hrmmmm...
In a New York Times article, Snowden reacts, stating:
"“I acted on my belief that the N.S.A.’s mass surveillance programs would not withstand a constitutional challenge, and that the American public deserved a chance to see these issues determined by open courts. Today, a secret program authorized by a secret court was, when exposed to the light of day, found to violate Americans’ rights. It is the first of many.”"
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
About fucking time. It is time to enforce the fourth amendment.
It isn't that the 4th Amendment isn't being enforced, but rather that there are conflicting ideas about how the 4th Amendment applies. I'm sure you think you know, but is yet to be seen how the courts will decide. It isn't 1789 anymore, and the 4th Amendment has been applied to a lot of situations and there is a lot of legal history (precedent) as to how it applies. It is entirely possible, maybe even likely that they will win at the trial court and lose on appeal. Only time will tell.
The fact that there are now courts in two different jurisdictions in conflict could make review by the Supreme Court more likely if the result doesn't change on appeal. It is way too early to pop champagne yet, there is still a long road ahead before this is truly decided.
They do what they want. Need court order? No problem, they just set up a secret court, that spits out authorizations, in secret, when they want it, they can even back date it.
Oh, this shit is all illegal? No worries, nobody will go to jail. They'll just say it was to catch them pedophiles.
U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon has been discovered with child pornography, cocaine, Al Qaeda literature, plans to bomb Congress and Justin Beiber albums.
When asked he said the albums were for his grand-daughter. Everything else was a plant by the Government.
Fox News reported that this Liberal Activist Judge is the norm for Democratic Presidential nominations and his guilt is obvious.
Sean Hannity states, "This is where Obama has pushed us."
Rush says, "What! What do you expect from a Democrat!"
Stewart makes some jokes...
Colbert makes some jokes...
Mahr makes some jokes...
The Internet talks out of their collective asses ....
And we make one more step towards World wide totalitarianism.
It's gonna happen. Just when I get hope of the future more shit happens that shows the dystopian future of scifi authors is coming true.
But without all the mass surveillance how will the NSA keep us safe from people like this that cold fjord is pissing himself over?
What's the difference? There is no difference. Someone revealed that crimes were being committed by the government. At great personal and professional cost. That person is a hero. This is as stupid simple as morality gets.
We find this guy hiding out in Russia and try him for the treasonous swine he is. Let the prison system determine just how he should be dealt. I say rotate him through at least one prison in each of the states.
The Jury
Maybe there is hope for the Yangs and the E Pleb Neesta yet.
See, if they had just done it with proper warrants, even if just thru the secret FISA court, it would be fine. Now they're gonna get their ass rammed by constiutional challenge..
And deservedly so.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
I reckon it's about time for another "crisis" to remind us all why we need to keep the NSA apprised of all of our private activity. For our own safety, of course.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
The hell you say.
I guess that judge didn't have any skeletons in his digital closet against which the NSA could apply "leverage."
You mean like DUI checkpoints?
All of the times when cases like this have gone the other way, the precedent cited was one about business dealings, which being voluntary, void your sole oversight over the details of those dealings.
The problem with that argument as it pertains to cell phones, is that the government maintains a monopoly on the airwaves which it licenses out to cell providers. It would be like the government licensing out all roads to be toll roads and then getting to track your movements because they were part of a business dealing.
I expect that the Court will only prohibit warrantless access to the phone call's content, the conversation. The the two phone numbers, a timestamp and a duration will probably still be accessible without a warrant.
To be clear, "the Court" is referring to the US Supreme Court. I believe they have authorized "metadata" in the past, addresses on envelopes.
If not this phase of technology used for National Security, there will be some other. In any case, what level of technology use by the government is safe or allowed? I suspect this issue/case is just one of a myriad of ongoing decisions to balance the use of technology for crime/safety while letting everyone (at least) feel like their privacy is respected.
[it doesn't take much to envision a stability to just-appearing technology so that they become applicable in many potentially intrusive ways...drones hovering above public places using instant facial recognition to identify any person-of-interest, without need to publish why interest arose...infra-red cameras on streetlights to track who is in each home and when...ubiquitous vehicle-tracking, engine-disabling technology to capture any suspect in a vehicle...100% person-presence tracking]
The technology is going to be everywhere, and it's understanding by the general populace is shrinking. The technocrats will provide the tools for the aristocrats and both will try to balance between appeasement and revolution by the rest of society. Choosing to avoid technology now will only handicap you. Some as-yet-unknown sci-fi authors will be heralded as prophets.
Of course they do, industrial espionage is within their original scope of operations so they've been doing it all along.
Read the judge's full ruling.
From TFCD: "Indeed, I have little doubt that the author of our Constiution, James Madison, who cautioned us to beware "the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power," would be aghast."
The next time someone, seeking to expand the government's power, uses the meme "those founding fathers' ideas don't apply to our modern times", keep the above in mind. Their theories predict all this assholery with stunning accuracy. And that is due to studying history as hundreds of governments play out over thousands of years. Even the belief pure democracy won't fall prey to this is 100% contraindicated based on long-term history.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Finally. A judge actually considering the intent of the founding fathers. This is too rare these days.
And if the USSC follows the precedent set in 1979, they will side with the NSA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_v._Maryland
Even if every politician saw things the way you and I do, and the NSA were completely defunded tomorrow, we would still have a huge problem. The NSA is made up of smart, highly-connected people who, as we now know, have very little concern for law or justice. The NSA needs to be dismantled as slowly and carefully as it was built, or it'll just turn into a mafia like the KGB did.
http://www.oregonstatehospital.net/d/russelltice-nsarnmebl.html
Spy satellites and remote sensing technology abound, if no one checks this out then nobody will discover their back up systems that are actually much more invasive, and work better any way.
Obama's solution is to issue an Executive order directing the FBI to kill the offending judge.
Problem solved.
...or has an awfully convenient scandal or whatever? The people he's messing with obviously feel they are above any laws.
Finally a step in the right direction to protecting civil liberties! For too long, we’ve been allowing the coming of an age where the civil liberties our forefathers fought so hard for are being eroded by the day. Freedom of Press, Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Assembly are mere ghostly images of their original intent. We’ve woken up to an Orwellian Society of Fear where anyone is at the mercy of being labeled a terrorist for standing up for rights we took for granted just over a decade ago. Read about how we’re waging war against ourselves at http://dregstudiosart.blogspot.com/2011/09/living-in-society-of-fear-ten-years.html
Quit blaming the presidents when congress is fully invested in the law
Just because someone handed you a gun do you really have to use that gun ?
Just because the congress handed the president a law does that mean the president MUST use it ?
And furthermore - the Patriot Act itself is NOT a violation of the Constitution - it's the ACTION of the NSA, the one which INVADED THE PRIVACY OF THE AMERICAN CITIZENS - which has constituted BLATANT VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA !!!
The congress was full of shit, yes, but that asshole living in the white house is also full of shit !
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
*With a statement in phone service tariffs of the need to access this data solely for billing purposes.
Have gnu, will travel.
Since when does something being unconstitutional stop such agencies from doing whatever the heck they want in the 21st century?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
well they are not searching and siezing it.
there just storing it.
a duplication of effort if you ask me.
your phone/interweb/utilitie/what-ever is doing it too.
"(it) appears to violate the Constitution's Fourth Amendment, which states that the 'right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.'"
So the Constitution states that it is not the use of collected personal information, but "unreasonable" collection and searches for information that is disallowed. The issue then swings on what could be considered reasonable. It does not seem to me that collecting all telephone metadata from everyone is a narrow enough criteria to be considered reasonable.
What's with this "likely" adjective crap? Did the judge actual use that adjective or did the media add that word? (I did RTFA.) The article quotes are forceful.
So what's with this with "likely" BS? Nobody ever says breaking into somebody's home without permission and stealing stuff is "likely illegal". What's with the double standard?
You thought that was bad? We shouldn't have admitted that? Totally didn't see that coming. Ok, making a list now... was there anything else you wanted to not know about?
Help stamp out iliturcy.
It is 'likely unconstitutional' to the same degree that burning at the stake is "likely unpleasant".
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Falling 10,000ft is likely to kill you.
Putting a gun to your head and pulling the trigger with a live cartridge in the firing stock is likely to kill you.
Detonating a Nuclear bomb while you straddle it is likely to kill you.
Seriously, right out of Dr. Strangelove: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzD-zGIJkbY
-Hack
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
Spying is bad.
Now lets see a show of hands of everybody who has never, EVER, looked at another person's browser history.
The NSA and CIA always spied on all non-Americans, so all it amounts to now, is equal treatment for everybody.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
the plaintiff in this case is not the crackpot we want fighting this with the potential to create precedence in favor of current government activities.
December 24, 2013 U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon was found dead yesterday in a severe car accident. The 54 year old highly regarded judge was under a lot of stress and drinking was reportedly involved. Mourning on this Christmas Eve are his late wife and child.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
I think of an autoplay video as direct evidence that someone is an incompetent writer, and I leave immediately. If you can cannot express your thoughts in a quotable, orderly context, you are very likely not worth my time.
Video is information pablum. When you're talking to the intelligent, the written word is the way to go. Only use video when nothing but a moving image can serve (tip: rarely, if ever, is this the case); only use still images when words will not serve. Yes, an image is worth a thousand words: The problem is, they're not your words, they are the viewer's words.
I cannot emphasize enough how writing encourages discourse and thought, while video rarely does anything of the sort.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The precise definition of what is reasonable is right there in the 4th amendment: It is probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, formally blessed as acceptable by the issuance of a warrant which describes the places to be searched, things to be seized. Once the government meets that standard of reasonableness, they may then commence to search.
You don't get to say what is reasonable; the 4th already does that. Is the target here a person's papers? Their home? Their property (effects)? The actual person themselves? If so, then if the standard of reasonableness explicitly laid out in the 4th is met, the government may search; otherwise, not.
The question here turns entirely on who has the ownership of that data, and what the obligations are with regard to it. Does the metadata on my calls meet the definition of being part of my papers? I think it's pretty obvious that it does, but that's just one person's opinion. If that data contains my private information, then the 4th applies. If, however, the data is not in any way "my" data/papers, then the question moves on as to the government's rights with regard to coercing data from the clutches of corporations.
Before anyone leaps to the conclusion that having done business, for instance, with the phone company or an Internet provider somehow magically makes that data public, let me point out that a letter between you and I, or you and your bank, is very definitely part of your papers. If you think the phone company being a party to your data makes your papers public, please explain why that obtains, but the letter you wrote to you bank is still in the domain of your private papers.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Bullshit. The Bush Administration claimed that water boarding wasn't torture. Do you need to see a court case to see that they were lying, or can you do that by yourself since you have a semi-functioning cerebral cortex? How about if tomorrow the military demands you let them bunk some soliders at your place. Would you need to see a court ruling that "homes" includes "apartments, condos and timeshares", or could you figure that one out for yourself?
The Fourth Amendment leaves zero wiggle room as both the person and place have to be named in warrants.
Again, bullshit. The 4th Amendment is crystal clear on this:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The US Constitution does not give the US President any authority to declare war. That is specifically a reserved power for the Congress.
From Section 8 of the US Constitution specifically the powers of Congress.
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
Sounds like some NSA agents are facilitating a crime.
If we people would do that we would go to jail. So who goes to jail from NSA? Someone has to accoutable for such decisions otherwise things will never change.