Federal Court Overturns Ruling That NSA Metadata Collection Was Illegal

New submitter captnjohnny1618 writes: NPR is reporting that an appeals court has overturned the decision that found the NSA's bulk data collection to be illegal. "Judges for the District of Columbia court of appeals found that the man who brought the case, conservative lawyer Larry Klayman, could not prove that his particular cellphone records had been swept up in NSA dragnets." The article clarifies that due to the recent passage of new laws governing how metadata is collected, this is of less significance than it would have otherwise been: "If you remember, after a fierce battle, both houses of Congress voted in favor of a law that lets phone companies keep that database, but still allows the government to query it for specific data. The three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia still decided to take on the case, because that new program doesn't begin until 180 days after the date that law was enacted (June 2, 2015.)" On top of that, the injunction from the earlier ruling never actually went into effect. Still, it seems like an important ruling to me: a government agency was willfully and directly violating the rights of the Americans (and international citizens as well) and now it's just going to get shrugged off?

Comments

So, effectively, all NSA data collection is legal

[QuietLagoon]

So long as we don't know about it, it is legal. Because if we don't know about it, then we cannot prove our data was gathered.

.
Sounds like good, self-serving logic for the NSA.

Re:You Can't prove Nothing

[QRDeNameland]

The problem is that since it is a secret gov't program, no one can actually prove they have standing. In other words, it is legally unassailable by design.

Re:No proof, no proof

[sexconker]

The government doing anything unconstitutional automatically grants every citizen the right to sue.
In fact, every citizen has the right to sue the government for anything, unconstitutional or not.
Hell, every citizen has the right to sue the government for nothing.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

A lawsuit is nothing more than a legal petition for a redress of grievances.

The court will determine the validity and extent of such grievances in a trial.
The court absolutely cannot reject a case by presupposing the facts of the matter (are the grievances real, what were they, who was affected, and to what extent) that can only be determined if a case is tried.