Slashdot Mirror
Judge Tells Feds To Be More Specific About Email Search Warrants
An anonymous reader writes "In yet another example of the judicial branch of the government becoming more critical of federal mass acquisition of personal data, federal magistrate judge John Facciola in D.C. 'denied a government warrant request to search an unnamed user's @mac.com e-mail address, citing the request as being overbroad.' The judge further noted (PDF), 'While it is evident from closely reading the Application and its attachments what the government is really after, it is equally evident that the government is using language that has the potential to confuse the provider—in this case Apple—which must determine what information must be given to the government. This Court should not be placed in the position of compelling Apple to divine what the government actually seeks. Until this Application is clarified, it will be denied.'"
Poor Federal Magistrate Judge John Facciola just became a target himself.
Not much new there.
Warrant requests are modified regularly.
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
Actually ask for a specific thing rather than everything that someone has ever done online? What if they miss something.
Federal Magistrate Judge John Facciola has been added to the no-fly list.
He's a good judge who's made a name for himself in electronic discovery. He's also... well, a Federal Magistrate Judge. Nobody at DHS is stupid enough to put a Federal Judge on the no-fly list. Actually, if anything, they would have them on some sort of VIP whitelist.
Nobody at DHS is stupid enough to put a Federal Judge on the no-fly list.
Why not? Congressmen did end up on this list a few times
Granted, they would probably be taken off when this issue comes up (unlike the rest of us who just have to deal with it).
Hoping that an email request will be seen by a provider as all data surrounding that account i.e. email, IM and other computer related tasks?
Great to see the US legal system noting that a vast set of historic data, complex links to other users exists beyond just a classic email accounts data.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
I'm sure if they were publicly asked if such a whitelist exists, they would deny it. And they would be lying. The first group that inspired the creation of the list is the list of state senators. Those were built into the system from day 1, I'm sure 100% of them are on the "always fly list". And then a few of the uppers in the NSA landed on the list due to travel etc, and raised hell, and got themselves added to the list by internal means. And it just snowballed from there as someone says "well if we're adding sensators and ourselves, who else would be a good idea to keep the heat off us?" Judges, celebs, secretaries of state, governers, union officials, and other powerful people added thereafter. I bet the list is well into the ten thousands by now.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
He's calling it "The Government" for the same reason prosecutors bring their cases in the name of "The People" or he himself talks about the opinion of "The Court". That's just the convention.
Government search request = *.*
And the IRS's "audit every year" list.
This judge has dealt with this issue in other cases, and in fact had previously told the government exactly what it should do in order to avoid the 4th Amendment problems of general warrants. FTA:
"[In a previous ruling, the Court] warned the government to “adopt stricter search parameters in future applications” or the Court would be "unwilling to issue any search and seizure warrants for electronic data that ignore the constitutional obligations to avoid ‘general’ electronic warrants.” Facebook Opinion, 2013 WL 7856600, at *8. The Court recommended several different approaches, including key word searches, using an independent special master to conduct searches, or segregating the people who are performing the search from those who are conducting the investigation.""
The government attorneys in this case are hopefully looking for a new gig. You don't ignore a judge and feed him boilerplate when he's already on to you.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
This.
No, not "this". He still doesn't understand, and is actually wrong in multiple respects. Besides, it has nothing to do with pleas, or buddies, or TV shows. It is a question of law.
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
Nobody at DHS is stupid enough to put a Federal Judge on the no-fly list.
Why not? Congressmen did end up on this list a few times
Granted, they would probably be taken off when this issue comes up (unlike the rest of us who just have to deal with it).
Federal Judges are more powerful than Congressmen in many ways. They are also, as a rule, more respectable.