Posted on 02/10/2015 7:19:14 PM PST by Olog-hai
A federal judge on Tuesday sided with the government in a lawsuit alleging the National Security Agency is illegally engaging in the bulk collection of Internet and telephone records in the hunt for potential terrorists.
U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White in Oakland said the plaintiffs in the case—AT&T customers—had not shown that all AT&T customers’ Internet communications were currently the subject of a “dragnet seizure and search program, controlled by or at the direction of the Government,” and they therefore did not have standing to file a lawsuit under the Fourth Amendment, which protects against warrantless searches and seizures.
White said the plaintiffs’ understanding of the key parts of the data collection process was “substantially inaccurate.”
Additionally, even if the plaintiffs had standing, White said a Fourth Amendment claim would have to be dismissed to protect secret information that would damage national security if released. He granted partial summary judgment for the government. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
That's happened before. Back in the 1770s.
Started with Marshall.
CWII Spark Ping — The Black Robed God-Kings Have Spoken!!
They know who butters their bread, and they like bread.
They obviously don’t, what with the providers of butter undermining the means to make bread.
And a finding in favor of the feds by a fed is to be taken seriously because......
Because of what the NSA will do afterwards?
Because this is essentially saying that the fourth amendment doesn’t exist for the NSA.
Exactly. More shredding of the Constitution by the unaccountable who shouldn’t have such power to begin with.
Oh, I agree that it’s bad. I’m just trying to make the point that the paradigm of feds being the ultimate judges of the limits of federal power needs changing.
What kind of logic is this?
They didn't show that all were harmed, therefore they do not have standing to file a complaint?
Is that how this works? Was this a mistake in plaintiff argument?
Any attorneys out there?
“...even if the plaintiffs had standing, White said a Fourth Amendment claim would have to be dismissed to protect secret information that would damage national security if released.”
Stunning...
As long as u take care to violate the privacy of ALL, the consequences are the same as doing so of NONE.
=
If you rob EVERY bank, well that’s the same consequences as robbing NO banks.
.......???
It ain’t easy being a black robed bitch these days.
Another Judge appointed by the Globalist GWB.
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.