Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

N.S.A. Phone Surveillance Is Lawful, Federal Judge Rules
New York Times ^ | December 27, 2013 | MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT and ADAM LIPTAK

Posted on 12/27/2013 2:17:39 PM PST by lbryce

A federal judge in New York on Friday ruled that the National Security Agency’s program that is systematically keeping phone records of all Americans is lawful, creating a conflict among lower courts and increasing the likelihood that the issue will be resolved by the Supreme Court.

In the ruling, Judge William H. Pauley III, of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, granted a motion filed by the federal government to dismiss a challenge to the program brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, which had tried to halt the program.

Judge Pauley said that protections under the Fourth Amendment do not apply to records held by third parties, like phone companies.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: becauseisayso; legal; nsa; obama; obamalegacy; obamunism; privacy; proislamist; spying
It is inexplicable to me that the extreme policies, activities advocated by this administration continue to find themselves legally viable, and despite the challenges they've faced as being counter to the principles, protection bestowed upon us our founding fathers, are nevertheless being permitted to stand, allowed to remain law of the land.
1 posted on 12/27/2013 2:17:39 PM PST by lbryce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Ruling’s not a surprise — this is going to the USSC.


2 posted on 12/27/2013 2:18:45 PM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

So if the govt contracts a company to do something they can ignore the entire Constitution?


3 posted on 12/27/2013 2:19:44 PM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: usconservative
FTA
“This blunt tool only works because it collects everything,” Judge Pauley said in the ruling.

**SNIP**

The ruling comes nearly two weeks after Judge Richard J. Leon of Federal District Court for the District of Columbia said the program most likely violated the Fourth Amendment. As part of that ruling, Judge Leon ordered the government to stop collecting data on two plaintiffs who brought the case against the government

In his ruling, Judge Leon said that the program “infringes on ‘that degree of privacy’ that the founders enshrined in the Fourth Amendment,” which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.

4 posted on 12/27/2013 2:24:36 PM PST by lbryce (Obama:The Worst is Yet To Come)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Pauley was nominated by President Bill Clinton on May 21, 1998.


5 posted on 12/27/2013 2:25:41 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (A courageous man finds a way, an ordinary man finds an excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Thanks very much for the insight.


6 posted on 12/27/2013 2:31:09 PM PST by lbryce (Obama:The Worst is Yet To Come)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lbryce
Next Step is the United States Supreme Court. Again, I don't think anyone's surprised that the Obama Administration went judge shopping to find a Federal court judge that agreed with their stance.

Fortunately (?) for us, the last word on the subject is the USSC and not Judge Pauley.

7 posted on 12/27/2013 2:34:27 PM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lbryce
SCOTUS ruled, in Smith v. Maryland, 442 US 735 (1979), that individuals have no legitimate expectation of privacy regarding the telephone numbers they dial because they knowingly give that information to the telephone companies when they dial the number.

In this case, ACLU v. Clapper, the judge notes a government admission that it has been collecting substantially ALL phone connection metadata since May 2006. This vacuuming of data by the government isn't something new or unique to the Obama administration. The government is continuously increasing its surveillance, as technology permits. Once in awhile it gets caught and Congress puts on a dog and pony show, complete with enactment of meaningless legislation. See, e.g., the Church Hearings.

8 posted on 12/27/2013 2:39:06 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: usconservative
Next Step is the United States Supreme Court. Again, I don't think anyone's surprised that the Obama Administration went judge shopping to find a Federal court judge that agreed with their stance.

Fortunately (?) for us, the last word on the subject is the USSC and not Judge Pauley.

Do Supreme Court justices use the telephone?

9 posted on 12/27/2013 2:40:12 PM PST by Steely Tom (If the Constitution can be a living document, I guess a corporation can be a person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

In 1979, when the FISA court was established, you had to get a warrant for the specific numbers you wanted to capture and trace. This could be done if a warrant was properly approved by the FISA court.

Back in those days, the information was analog, not digital.

Today, you still need a FISA court warrant for a specific use or target. What the NSA did was get three month warrants for the entire country and the FISA court approved that, in clear contradiction to the FISA law.

Also, in 2013, most telephonic communication is digital INCLUDING THE CONVERSATION. Now, the call can be reconstructed in the future, including the CONTENT of the call because all of the digital information has been hoovered for future reference.

This is why this needs to be stopped. no more hoovering. That’s for vacuum cleaners only.

If the NSA or FBI has a specific target, they may apply for a FISA court warrant for that. Otherwise, they cannot be allowed to just take all telephonic information with the expectation of future use at their whim and direction. Doing that makes a mockery of the Fourth Amendment.


10 posted on 12/27/2013 2:46:54 PM PST by exit82 ("The Taliban is on the inside of the building" E. Nordstrom 10-10-12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

William H. Pauley III.... a Bill Clintoon appointee


11 posted on 12/27/2013 2:48:59 PM PST by dennisw (The first principle is to find out who you are then you can achieve anything -- Buddhist monk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

As their employers, shouldn't we the people have access to all communications (land lines, cell phones, email, browsing history, social, blogs, letters, Valerie whisperings, etc.) to and from the Executive, Judicial, & Legislative branches?

Those things would be something to see.

12 posted on 12/27/2013 2:50:30 PM PST by Bronzewound (Lost Hope & Loose Change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: lbryce
so lets tap into the judges lines and see how long the ruling will last.
13 posted on 12/27/2013 2:57:08 PM PST by bikerman (Obama! if his lips are moving he's lying.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
Do Supreme Court justices use the telephone?

Do Supreme Court justices re-write a law so that it becomes a "tax" and therefore withstands Constitutional scrutiny?

There's the rub isn't it? While I'll argue all day long this issue is going to the USSC, given the current radical makeup of the court on the left, a few seasoned Conservatives on the right, and a Chief Justice more concerned with the court's "image" than actually applying the law, who in their right mind really knows which way this thing will go once it reaches the Supremes?

I sure as hell don't .....

14 posted on 12/27/2013 3:01:00 PM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

>> Ruling’s not a surprise — this is going to the USSC.

More cover for Congress that’s enabling the alleged violations.

Our “representatives” are completely AWOL.


15 posted on 12/27/2013 3:02:13 PM PST by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: usconservative

The last word on the subject is we, the people.


16 posted on 12/27/2013 3:13:33 PM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
The last word on the subject is we, the people.

No it's not. The last word is them people over there. They're the ones in the 53% getting some form of government check every month while the rest of us mopes work and support their lazy asses.

Unless you meant something different, as in not at the ballot box?

17 posted on 12/27/2013 3:24:22 PM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

The FedMob government is flagrantly lawless from top to bottom, TigersEye rules.


18 posted on 12/27/2013 3:27:49 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

“This blunt tool only works because it collects everything,”
Did not stop the Boston bombing...
Neither did a Russian HEADS UP!?
Stoopid stupid soupid. Govmint government gubment.


19 posted on 12/27/2013 3:40:14 PM PST by Recompennation (Constitutional protection for all not just selectively for Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recompennation
“This blunt tool only works because it collects everything,”

Which is why the Federal Government failed to provide a single instance where an act of terrorism was prevented .... and as you've noted the Boston Marathon Bombing.

This whole thing stinks to high heaven. It's time for the revolution. These lawless bastards aren't going to go if voted out, it's time to put them out.

20 posted on 12/27/2013 3:50:03 PM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

A Federal judge who neither understands the Constitution nor supports it.


21 posted on 12/27/2013 4:12:02 PM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

“SCOTUS ruled, in Smith v. Maryland, 442 US 735 (1979), that individuals have no legitimate expectation of privacy regarding the telephone numbers they dial because they knowingly give that information to the telephone companies when they dial the number.”

I publish my home address. So, I guess I have given the government the right to a little look-see in my front window. But it’s ok if they are doing it to everybody.

This also violates the 5th amendment right against self-incrimination, even though I’m sure the black-robed cabal would argue that I didn’t invoke those rights with the proper words.

It all stinks, IMHO.


22 posted on 12/27/2013 4:18:52 PM PST by Chaguito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Pauly Shore?


23 posted on 12/27/2013 5:02:28 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

A ruling from a federal judge is no different than the opinion of some random jackass these days.

The system needs to be reigned in big time.


24 posted on 12/27/2013 5:11:18 PM PST by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chaguito

And if you don’t use the phone (much), that creates probable cause that you are criminal (otherwise, why would you make an effort to “hide”?), so any (federal) judge will grant a warrant.


25 posted on 12/27/2013 5:21:59 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Heh, heh. Sort of like too much time out of sight of the telescreen becomes probable cause.


26 posted on 12/27/2013 7:08:21 PM PST by Chaguito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Recompennation

Islamists get a free pass.


27 posted on 12/28/2013 10:16:51 AM PST by a fool in paradise ("Health care is too important to be left to the government.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

I’m pretty sure the NSA is the reason why Obamacare was found to be constitutional.


28 posted on 12/28/2013 10:44:51 AM PST by chae (I was anti-Obama before it was cool)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

This ruling would make all wiretaps legal.


29 posted on 12/28/2013 12:52:43 PM PST by P-Marlowe (There can be no Victory without a fight and no battle without wounds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: usconservative

“Fortunately (?) for us, the last word on the subject is the USSC and not Judge Pauley.”

Yes, that went so well for us on Obamacare, didn’t it?


30 posted on 12/28/2013 1:25:48 PM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears ("There's always free cheese in a mousetrap." - Marine Col. Peter Martino)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

And on same sex marriage.


31 posted on 12/28/2013 2:37:02 PM PST by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

It may be legal (meaning it complies with some law congress enacted) but it is certainly unconsitutional. The USSC will end up ruling that the current laws allowing this crap, are unconstitutional.


32 posted on 12/28/2013 2:39:37 PM PST by Go Gordon (Barack McGreevey Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

Judge Pauley should be impeached. No way government is authorized to collect everybody’s every communication and store them. It is a clear prescription for abuse of power.


33 posted on 12/28/2013 2:51:48 PM PST by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Yes, that went so well for us on Obamacare, didn’t it?

I trust you either understood the sarcasm or saw follow-up posts.......No, I don't trust this USSC who's led by a chief justice more concerned about the court's "image" than actually applying the Constitution.

34 posted on 12/28/2013 3:09:38 PM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Judges are appointed to be political hacks.
So one can find a Judge who will ok or not ok anything.

The USSA judicial system has been a farce for years.


35 posted on 12/28/2013 6:51:42 PM PST by OldArmy52 (The question is not whether Obama ever lies, but whether he ever tells the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: OldArmy52

Do not rely on justice from the USSCourt.
At least half the justices are political hacks and the CJ is weak and likely being blackmailed.

The Constitution is regarded less well than toilet paper now.


36 posted on 12/28/2013 6:54:00 PM PST by OldArmy52 (The question is not whether Obama ever lies, but whether he ever tells the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

We have to assume that the Supreme Court Justices, along with all of CONgress, Federal Court Judges, State Legislatures, Courts, and Governors are being spied on by the NSA and are potentially being blackmailed.


37 posted on 12/29/2013 11:14:31 AM PST by Count of Monte Fisto (The foundation of modern society is the denial of reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

“Islamists get a free pass.”


While they are ‘watching’ us, God is WATCHING “them” violate us. God commands that ‘vengeance’ belongs to Him. That He, will repay. We shall endure this, AND all THINGS for Christ, who in the END will deliver us up to Himself, to BE WITH HIM!

You can have peace knowing...no matter how dangerous the things our adversaries do to us, their efforts are “still”, in the end, in vain. Our Lord is NOT SLACK in His Promises.

“Romans 12:19
Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Romans 12:18-20

PRAISE THE FATHER, AND THE SON!


38 posted on 12/29/2013 1:44:18 PM PST by ourworldawry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: lbryce
Just because some clown in a magic black robe says something, doesn't mean it's true.

Remember that the Supreme Clown, Roger Taney, said stuff about blacks in America that was patent garbage.

The only reason clowns like this make their clownishness stick is that there are guys with guns backing them up.

That's what is known as "tyranny"...

39 posted on 12/30/2013 9:48:41 AM PST by kiryandil (turning Americans into felons, one obnoxious drunk at a time (Zero Tolerance!!!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Go Gordon
I hope you are correct.

But I think it is impossible to know what this supreme court is going to do since it has become obvious in the last few years that 6 or 7 of the nine justices are as crazy as rats in a tin [out]house during a hail storm.

40 posted on 12/30/2013 1:01:02 PM PST by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th (and 17th))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: lbryce
Further evidence that Thomas Jefferson was 100% correct in his assessment of the judicial branch of our federal government:

The germ of dissolution of our federal government is in the constitution of the federal Judiciary; an irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow) working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped.

-- Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Charles Hammond, August 18, 1821

41 posted on 12/30/2013 1:09:24 PM PST by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th (and 17th))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson