EFF Tells Court That the NSA Knowingly and Illegally Destroyed Evidence
An anonymous reader writes in with this latest bit of EFF vs NSA news. 'We followed the back and forth situation earlier this year, in which there were some legal questions over whether or not the NSA needed to hang onto surveillance data at issue in various lawsuits, or destroy it as per the laws concerning retention of data. Unfortunately, in the process, it became clear that the DOJ misled FISA court Judge Reggie Walton, withholding key information. In response, the DOJ apologized, insisting that it didn't think the data was relevant — but also very strongly hinting that it used that opportunity to destroy a ton of evidence. However, this appeared to be just the latest in a long history of the NSA/DOJ willfully destroying evidence that was under a preservation order.
The key case where this evidence was destroyed was the EFF's long running Jewel v. NSA case, and the EFF has now told the court about the destruction of evidence, and asked the court to thus assume that the evidence proves, in fact, that EFF's clients were victims of unlawful surveillance. The DOJ/NSA have insisted that they thought that the EFF's lawsuit only covered programs issued under executive authority, rather than programs approved by the FISA Court, but the record in the case shows that the DOJ seems to be making this claim up.'
The key case where this evidence was destroyed was the EFF's long running Jewel v. NSA case, and the EFF has now told the court about the destruction of evidence, and asked the court to thus assume that the evidence proves, in fact, that EFF's clients were victims of unlawful surveillance. The DOJ/NSA have insisted that they thought that the EFF's lawsuit only covered programs issued under executive authority, rather than programs approved by the FISA Court, but the record in the case shows that the DOJ seems to be making this claim up.'
1) Is posting AC really Anonymous?
2) Has Slashdot ever received a FISA letter?
In general I think that destroying evidence should result in the assumption that they're hiding a worst case scenario. So I agree with the EFF. Destroying evidence = automatically guilty of accusations. Have a nice day.
I don't read AC A human right
The NSA could admit that they break the law every day of the week, murder Americans on american soil, steal millions of dollars, destroy companies and even the entire economy, and do you know what will happen?
Absolutely nothing.
They believe they are above the law. And heck, most of the legislative branch believes they are above the law. The judicial and executive branches are more than willing to look the other way, so as a result, the NSA gets a free pass to do whatever they want.
Because.... national security... and boogyman terrorists... and something, something mumble mumble. Whatever the fear flavor of the week is. 1984 was an instruction manual.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Things are going to slide, slide in all directions
Won't be nothing
Nothing you can measure anymore
The blizzard, the blizzard of the world
has crossed the threshold
and it has overturned
the order of the soul - Leonard Cohen "The Future"
These are not isolated events anymore. Everything is being turned upside down.
These fucking people are out of control and need some serious jail time.
Look where all this talking got us, baby.
The preservation order overrides any policies and destruction rules.
They knew that to destroy those records was both illegal and obstruction.
As to fishing expedition, apparently the judge didn't think so.
The destruction of that data is required by law.*
*only when it conveniently helps the government.
Go destroy some evidence in a case against you where a judge has ordered you to preserve it. Let me know how that works out for you. The NSA will get away with it. You'll be asking Bubba to make sure he uses some lube.
Look where all this talking got us, baby.
it seems to work for President Obama too.
I know this is a troll, but people would do well to remember that being unable to hold the government accountable for their actions is a much greater threat to national security than any outside entity could muster against the people.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
Keeping the US safe is a clear and compelling interest that takes priority over a measly civil claim.
Ah, yes, "The ends justify the means". The trouble with that is that the means determine the end. If your means are corrupt, lawless and arbitrary, just what sort of outcome do you expect?
I believe this has been discussed previously: Matthew 7:16, 1 Samuel 24:13, Matthew 12:33, Luke 6:43, James 3:12
Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
I wish more people weren't willing to put up with their government breaking the law. We should be up in arms about shit like this because it decays the very foundations of this country.
Nah, he just read about the dog eating his homework in the news the next day.
Nah, he just read about the dog eating his homework the next day. Found out with the rest of us
That "measly civil claim" is the US Constitution. The US Constitution vs new lines and added paragraphs adding extra "national security" color of law?
If any gov can just say evidence does not exist, that no court can see it, that no paper work can be found - the legal system stops for an entire cadre of gov workers.
How long before more gov agencies, bureaucracies and well connected contractors try the same color of law trick? All they have to do is spin up a "national security" story and at a federal level, state or city level your access to any court is reduced to a very expensive request?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Colossians 3:22
The destruction of that data is required by law. EFF tried to go on a fishing expedition.
Both the FISA court and Federal court eventually decided that the NSA was both allowed to, and required to, preserve information relevant to the ongoing cases, and the NSA both knew this and also eventually advocated for this position. See: https://www.techdirt.com/artic....
Court-ordered legal discovery also has force of law and would supercede any legal requirement to destroy information by plaintiffs or defendents.
And the DOJ did not assert the EFF was on a "fishing expedition"; it argued that it misunderstood the scope of discovery, and would not have destroyed the information in question if it did (which seems highly improbable given the circumstances).
Actually, I agree with all of the leaks and believe their foreign spying was immoral.
What about the bandwagon fallacy that many authoritarians spew forth in an effort to justify the spying? "Everyone is doing it, so it's okay!" Well, no, it's not, because everyone has rights, and we shouldn't violate even the rights of foreigners without a damn good reason (i.e. evidence that they're enemies).
Tell you what Federal Government... if you consider this a defense against destroying evidence, then certainly you'd be okay with lowly citizens that are supposed to be EQUAL to you before the law to use the same defense when you bring us to trial...
Right? Or are we the only ones that have to follow the rules?
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
True. The NSA, as a government agency, is obliged to follow the rules, in spirit as well as letter. Well said.
Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
Why the fuck aren't you, if you think it's such a good idea? You want the meat, you butcher it your own goddamn self. Whining that something should be done, but isn't, and insinuating that you're not doing it yourself == makes you a useless tool. Grow a fucking pair and stand behind your beliefs or shove it.
Because if one or two people that are fed up act on it and they get brushed off, 20 people act up get sent to jail, 200 get still get sent to jail but get a dismissive blurb in the local paper, 2,000 they get pepper sprayed and leader charged with inciting riot, 20,000,000 get a senator or two to half heartedly admit there might be an issue that might need looking into and never do anything substantive, It takes a critical mass to effect change
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
That's... sort of how it works, but not exactly. Depending on the jurisdiction involved, this leads to 'spoilation inference', where the destroyed evidence is considered 'conscience of guilt' and the court will consider the destroyed evidence as strongly against the spoiling party.
Don't just stand there, get that other dog!
I used to financially support the NRA, under the assumption that they defended the 2nd amendment. A while age I realized that was not actually correct,
The EFF is the best example of an entity that defends *all* amendments. I now financially support them, every month. When NPR comes begging for money I'm happily able to refuse, secure in the knowledge that EFF is far more effective in their use of funds than NPR when it comes to presevring the Constitution.
There are a ton of relatively affluent people here on Slashdot. It certainly wouldn't hurt you to allocate a small amount of money to EFF annually, and we know their results.
If that dog only ate your homework the consequence is limited between that dog and you
But in the reality is that the dog, aka, the Government of the United States of America, has eaten the Constitution
The Constitution of the United States of America used to be the HIGHEST LAW OF THE LAND, used to be , no longer, because the way that motherfucking dog is behaving, it not only ignores the Constitution, it goes directly AGAINST what the United States of America is all about !
We call ourselves a "democracy", we call ourselves "the land of the free, home of the braves" ?
Well ... the only FREE thing is the freedom of that fucking dog in destroying the country, and the BRAVERY of the government to LIE UNDER OATH !!
It's not that I like to swear, it's not that I enjoy using vulgar words, but as an American, I simply can't stand any longer what is going on !!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
"I used to financially support the NRA, under the assumption that they defended the 2nd amendment. A while age I realized that was not actually correct"
Um, no... the NRA is still the only organization that FIGHTS for the 2nd amendment. Gun Owners of America IMHO is a fig leaf for people who want to claim they care about the 2nd while being ineffectual in doing it. I personally wish there was an NRA-equivalent (that had members of the House and Senate quaking in their boots) for EACH of the 10 amendments that form the Bill of Rights. For example, we need a well-funded RUTHLESS grass-roots organization dedicated to JUST the 4th amendment that will tolerate NO politician who would support ANY search of a person, his home, his papers (information, "meta" or not) and his "effects" (other possessions) that would be comitted without a specific narrowly-drawn sworn-out under-oath search warrant. The NRA should NOT be the only organization with that zeal for the constitution and the 2nd amendment should NOT be the only amendment that has such a zealous supporter. And, no - the ACLU is not there for any of that (they get all tangled-up in favorite left-wing social and fiscal causes, let their politics drive them to weighing whether to enter any particular fight over any particular amendment, and have been far too willing to go mushy on the 1st and 2nd when their left-wing friends are stomping on them.)
"...the knowledge that EFF is far more effective in their use of funds than NPR when it comes to presevring the Constitution. "
Yikes! NPR is government-run pro-government propaganda; they're NO example of ANYTHING positive - the equivalent of Pravda, or some Goebels-run outfit. The American left USED to shout slogans AGAINST "the man"... now the left that used to burn draft cards and THINK the evil federal government MIGHT be spying on it, turns to the central government for EVERYTHING (food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, news, entertainment, etc.) even KNOWING that government is spying on them! So much for things like "never trust anyone over 40" and "Hey Hey LBJ, How many kids did you kill today?". If the government resumed the draft today, I suspect there'd be a lot of left-wing Obama supporters who'd SUPPORT the draft and turn-in anybody trying to escape to Canada!
NPR should NEVER have been created in the United States, should never have been funded or licensed, and should have been shut down long ago. For all you left-wingers who love it (thereby exposing just how completely left-wing it has become while funded by ALL taxpayers) you should ask yourselves a serious question: Would "Air America" have survived and been forced to become better and more-competative if NPR had not been there as a place for liberal listeners to go to? That's the free market, and IF liberal ideas really ARE good, then they should succeed and prosper in such a market. Without NPR (which, as a government mouthpiece, has to live within certain bounds) I'd bet a MORE liberal commercial radio network WOULD HAVE succeeded (and liberals on Capitol Hill would not always be having to fight for NPR funding and worry that the GOP might succeed in cutting it).
Here's a new sneaky approach, less destructive but so far effective: U.S. Marshals Seize Cops’ Spying Records to Keep Them From the ACLU
Belief is the currency of delusion.
You're a fool for assuming that doing something to stop this, requires violent protests. That would be counterproductive, no matter how many people you have on your side.
Meanwhile, those same 2,000 people, in a single congressional district, can swing the outcome of the vote. Even just the fear of that, will make the representative in question ready to do whatever your bidding... Including starting an congressional investigation into NSA's practices.
Hell, with your proposed 2 million people, even with them only just voting the way you tell them, you would be the dictator of whatever the state, and would completely determine all the races for senator and house representatives in that state. You would single-handedly choose which Presidential candidate wins that state, which could be HUGE. You would have the heads of both the political parties, coming to your home on a regular basis, trying to find out what they can possibly say or do that month, to get you to vote for their side in the next election.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
That is an unbelievably stupid argument by the DOJ. It's common sense that when the court orders you to preserve documents, you hold on to any documents which may remotely be affected at all. This is a clear cut case of contempt of court and ought to be prosecuted as such.
The DOJ is setting a fine example for all other law abiding citizens out there. I expect to see more "I misunderstood the scope of discovery" excuses in forthcoming civil and criminal cases.
AC has a point, albeit somewhat crudely worded. You need a trigger to start the critical mass rolling. We might still have racial segregation today if Rosa Parks obediently gave up her seat when ordered to do so. Mahatma Gandhi did not have that critical mass when he started his Salt March, the march inspired many other to join him and later turned into civil rebellion.
Of course its easier to say it can't be done, sit back and complain over the internet =)
Shooting politicians will almost certainly effect change, but it most likely won't be the change that you're looking for.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
It actually turns out to be very easy to do something about it:
https://supporters.eff.org/don...
Supporting EFF is a good start, I agree, but it's no magic solution. Remember, EFF's lawsuit about the NSA dragnet was completely stopeed in its tracks by the "state secrets" defense for YEARS, until Snowden's leak put the relevant info into the public domain, when it was finally allowed to proceed.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant