Slashdot Mirror
California Legislation Affirms Privacy Rights Against NSA Spying Methods
New submitter amxcoder writes: "A recent bill making its way through the California state legislature reaffirms 4th amendment protections against NSA-style wiretapping of cell phones and computer records, and declares that the NSA's data collection methods and practices are unconstitutional. The bill has passed the California Senate with only a single opposing vote. It would require a warrant to be issued by a Judge before the state's law enforcement and other departments can assist federal agencies in obtaining these records. Similar bills in other states are trickling through the legislative process, but California's is the furthest along. At the least, it will establish that a state of 38 million people are unhappy with the NSA's methods."
Who's up for 24/7 full documentation of the every move, utterance, and action, of the asshole who voted against it?
The DOJ will simply take the State of California to court. CA will lose.
So are they going to unplug http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A ?
Legal marijuana...
Anti-NSA spying laws...
Right up until some state full knuckle-draggers (like California) vote against gay marriage.
...and California, much as it likes to think it's a country unto itself, has NO jurisdiction over the NSA, over their methods, even over their agents (when acting in an official capacity and all those other qualifiers)
If it makes the CA legislature feel good about themselves to do this, great! But it means about as much as the lot of them threatening to hold their breath till the NSA stops spying...
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
The NSA already ignores the US Constitution, the highest law of the land which they are sworn to uphold, or at least their bosses are when they're sworn in. Does anyone really think a state law (from a non-swing state) will matter?
Nice federal highway funding there you have there, California. Would be a shame if something were to happen to it.
Assuming this thing passes, the end state of the bill isn't acceptable. At best, public awareness incites a response from the DOJ which decides to overrule in the interest of national security. At best, it hastens a growing shrug of the shoulders from the public as the waves of abuse keep coming to light and people go about their business. Let's all retweet "F THE FCC" and it'll be about as effective...but it might get a laugh? Reclassify ISPs as common carriers already... (Damn. Lost my 14 y/o /. ID and the first post I make when I return is a troll...apologies.)
The federal government would need a warrant from a judge if it wants the cooperation of California officials
I'm pretty sure the NSA can already get a lot of information WITHOUT cooperating with state government officials.
guessing the nsa is simply a civil service organization they would have no ability to function without instructions from the wmd on credit cabalists http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=wmd+on+credit+cabal drawn out state legislation is just more dragging out the invasion of our hearts minds & spirits
...and fully stopped the NSA data collection process, what's to stop them from turning around a buying a similar feed from GCHQ?
The NSA already goes right to the source for these records. This law is nothing but pandering to an ignorant public. State agencies? They go right to AT&T, Verizon, et al for your phone records. They go right to MS, Google, yahoo and others for the computer records. At best this simply stops teh NSA from using state agencies as gophers. That's it. This law is useless because yet again, the lawmakers do not understand technology or are being willfully ignorant to get re-elected.
captcha: numbers
yeah, that makes sense.
Certainly everyone applauding this will agree that similar laws meant to reaffirm second amendment protections are equally necessary, equally valid, and equally worth fighting for!
http://firearmsfreedomact.com/
From the article:
"The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is very clear. It says the government shall not engage in unreasonable search and seizure," said the bill's author, Democratic State Senator Ted Lieu, of Torrance.
Let's try a little modification....
"The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is very clear. It says the government shall not infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms," said no one in California's legislature, ever.
Just remember, when you erode one part of the Constitution, you erode them all. Feinstein wants ALL of your rights. Buuuuut... let's hear your reasons why this is different.
The Fourth Amendment only applies to the Federal government, and no state statute can reduce or increase those rights. Of course, the state itself may be limited by the Fourth (through the Fourteenth), and in that case, no state statute can reduce those rights. California may try to pass laws that provide additional protection not governed by the Fourth, provided it does not violate the Supremacy clause, and that's fine, but its unlikely to limit federal activities expressly provided for by federal statute.
There is no real dispute over the right to wiretap without a warrant (although some claim to the contrary, its not the Federal government doing the claiming), at least not since the Bush administration got into hot water over that issue.
As to the applicability of the Fourth to metadata acquisition, the Supreme Court addressed that point more than thirty years ago in Smith v. Maryland. Cases claiming that Smith is somehow inapplicable to the NSA issues are working their way through the courts, and time will tell. But it is still a legal reach to assert
that metadata acquisition somehow violates the Fourth Amendment, without qualification, given the clear Supreme Court law on the subject.
... that gives California police officers the right to copy your phone contents when they pull you over?
What about THAT right to privacy?
when our government can trump them with their " think of the terrorists / kids / national security / state secrets " bullshit.
:/
They're already breaking constitutional laws on an epic scale, do you really think they give two shits about breaking some more ?
It's akin to thinking the " no guns " sign on the front door of a bank will somehow magically avert a bank robbery
A nice symbolic gesture perhaps, but laughable if anyone believes it will make any difference.
The only way this gets fixed is when the companies realize that being in bed with the US govt is great, until you get caught. At which point you've eroded public trust to the point you can't GIVE away your product. You may as well blow out the candles and go home.
The California legislature doing the right thing? Since when? 1977?
Cranky educator.
DIdn't California vote for the Snooper in Chief? You know, the one that could stop all the spying tomorrow with a single executive order?
I hope this works, do you really think the power hungry politicians are going to stop spying on each other and the people, to get dirt on them for there own elections. As long as there is tax dollars sent to the government there will be the NSA, and they will get stronger as time goes on and technology gets better. So I'm sure they will definitely continue spying on us. Remember transparency by this US Government, so it will never stop. They will tell us that you the sheep, will stop watching you, the fact is as long as tax dollars are collected it will continue. I have been using http://lookseek.com/ for about a year the non tracking private search engine to protect my privacy.