Slashdot Mirror
The 5 Cases That Could Pit the Supreme Court Against the NSA
An anonymous reader writes: We've all been wondering how the U.S. Judicial branch will deal with the NSA's bulk metadata surveillance. Getting a case to the Supreme Court isn't a quick process, so we haven't seen much movement yet. But later this year, several cases have the potential to force a Supreme Court ruling on the NSA, whether they like it or not. Ars summarizes the five likeliest cases, and provides estimates on their timelines. For example, Klayman v. Obama was one of the first lawsuits filed after the Snowden leaks were published. The first judge to hear it actually ordered the government to halt the metadata program and destroy all data, but stayed his own order pending appeal. The case is now awaiting a decision from the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, and several other high-profile lawsuits are awaiting its outcome. The decision in Klayman will have a domino effect on NSA-related court battles across the country.
As an American of course I wish that the SCOTUS would honor the very spirit that makes the USA special - in which, the government should never have given any power to intrude on the citizens' rights
But then, as a person who knows what the United States of America has turned into ... I ain't gonna be holding my breath
Them SCOTUS people are as corrupt as the rest --- and to think the NSA (and those powerful god-like beings who holds control over spook agencies such as NSA) don't already have influences over the SCOTUS judges is to deny the reality
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
I'd feel a lot better about this case if the plaintiff (Klayman) weren't proceeding pro se and actually had a lawyer who knew how to argue a case instead of using his pleadings as a political soap box.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
I am Sam. Uncle Sam I am.
That Uncle Sam, that Uncle Sam, I do not trust that Uncle Sam.
Do you like backbone voice/data taps and bulk retention?
I do not like them, Uncle Sam. They're just tools for blackmail, thugs and future despots. They am.
Would you like them here or there?
What bullshit, Sam. You put them everywhere.
Would you like it bound by Charter? Can I promise to do no evil? Tartar?
We tried that, Sam. The old folks have retired and it's run by young sociopaths who don't see anything wrong with even tapping their own poor children. They're smart-stupids, blinded by the buck and the tech, they do not realize what a sorry-ass country this could become WHEN that stuff falls in the wrong hands.
Then introduce a bill into the House. Ask your senator, man... or mouse?
Mumble National Security mumble, they say. I think they are under blackmail, today.
Then will you, won't you, take it to the Judge? [wink]
We did, in Hepting vs. AT&T. The only case that would have exposed, in the discovery process, the true extent of domestic telecom surveillance. The Ninth Circuit dismissed the case by citing a law that was enacted AFTER the case was filed. The Supreme Court refused to hear it. Miscarriage of justice, much?
Your bitter phrases take lots of time, you cannot even make them rhyme.
That's because I trying to communicate something REAL, asshole.
Should I put NSA in a box?
Guard the hen house with a fox?
You mean, appoint a Director that goes before Congress under oath, pretends to know nothing and needs both hands to find his ass in the dark?? We've tried that too. I thought it was unlawful to lie to Congress, guess not.
Would you like it on a boat? Would you like it with a goat?
That's the kind of transparent childish misdirection we've come to expect from you people. Like that stupid false metadata conundrum, a limited hang-out where you 'pretend' to relinquish voluntary data sharing agreements, and fill everyone's ears with talk of metadata. When all the while the backbone taps ensure you will obtain all that by other means, and more besides.
You do not like Big Brother, so you say,
Try it! Try it! And you may.
Fuck off.
It's been tried, Stalin would be proud of what we have built already. The TRUE extent of our domestic spy apparatus is, by now, probably hidden and partitioned into layers. The folks who built it out knew full well it would not pass Constitutional muster, and so they have probably created a series of interlocking pieces and black-funded faux-telecom 'private' companies that have title of the 'assets'. It may require a massive de-funding and deconstruction effort, and the sociopaths that have built this thing may 'turn turtle' and put their legs in the air... but that will NOT be enough. We're back to Hepting vs. AT&T again, it is the private telecommunications technicians that must come forward en masse and help identify these interconnect points.
I wish I could trust you, Uncle Sam
Can I interest you in some... spam?
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>