Skip to comments.District Court Opinion Enjoins Bulk Metadata Collection Program
Posted on 12/16/2013 11:14:13 AM PST by John W
This today from Judge Richard Leon of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Judge Leon appears to have stayed his opinion pending review. I havent read it yet. But it concludes:
In the months ahead, other Article III courts, no doubt, will wrestle to find the proper balance consistent with our constitutional system. But in the meantime . . . I will grant Larry Klaymans and Charles Stranges request for an injunction and enter an order that (1) bars the Government from collecting, as part of the NSAs Bulk Telephony Metadata Program, any telephony metadata associated with their personal Verizon accounts and (2) requires the Government to destroy any such metadata in its possession that was collected through the bulk collection program.
However, in light of the significant national security interests at stake in this case and the novelty of the constitutional issues, I will stay my order pending appeal. In doing so, I hereby give the Government fair notice that should my ruling be upheld, this order will go into effect forthwith.
Well have a summary, and Im sure, lots of comments.
Wow. That drives a stake in my heart. Chilling.
I was trying to view that in some type of favorable light, but, as you point out there is a very chilling interpretation of what was stated.
Our judiciary is viewing our foundational legal document as a “novelty” or they view the interpretation of issues therefrom as novel. I can’t tell which it is, but either way, it’s frightening.
I might need to move up my timetable for buying a boat and enough supplies to get out of dodge quick.
There must be easier ways to convince the NSA to open a file on you.
I think he’s using novelty in the sense of uniqueness of the case.
Sort of like a sealed file in court. The file is there, it was "opened" or "created." But accessing the contents is supposed to be reserved based on need.
But the fact that there is a file in the first place seems to violate the 4th, whether its opened or not.
That’s what I was hoping. As in, someone is finally filing on our government ignoring the Constitution.
Because I'm not sure on that whole "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects" thing.
Not according to federal courts who have reviewed the vacuuming of data. It's not a search until a human looks at it, with a purpose.
The order does not give a time limit for the government to appeal the ruling.
Nor does it require the NSA to stop data collection during the appeals process.
So if the government claims that it is going to appeal, but never does actually follow through, does this effectively nullify the order?
Dodge is near a large body of water? That global warming sure works fast!
- If I liked going on a $100 million dollar vacation to Africa
- I will also now go on a 17-day vacation in Hawaii
- I have lots of dumb honkies in Washington state getting double-debited for their healthcare because they gave me their bank info .
- Somebody has to pay for all the poor oppressed minorities and crooked multi-millionaire politicians
- Sign up now young white Americans - you can trust me!
File is accurate but the term “dossier” is more chilling.
I'd like to hear both Bush 2 and Obama testify under oath, since we were attacked on 9-11 by Saudi foreign nationals, why it is that our government “by and for the people” have decided to create dossiers and spy on every American. Except for the incompetence of those who failed to protect us, we are not the problem.
Just maybe they need to start controlling the immigration, borders and VISA entry and exit process, in lieu of stealing our freedoms and rights.
Now they are saying the Somalis in Minnesota that they allowed to settle here are a terror threat. I've become very cynical of all politicians because few of them work for the people.
That may be what he means, probably is. What is horribly wrong here is that aside from the technology in use, there's nothing unique about violations of the Constitution.
Technology or so called threats to "national security" do not abrogate the Constitution.
This is a clear message to the Stalinists in DC that they can delay and obfuscate as long as possible (which will be a very long time) while they bring sufficient and appropriate pressure to bear on the next level of the courts, to which they will be appealing.
In my layman's (very opinionated) opinion, the government will eventually win the appeal. One way or the other. This judge covered his conscience, while screwing us and the Constitution.
The deadlines for an appeal are set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which contain strict time limits.