Posted on 05/14/2006 2:21:04 PM PDT by angkor
Are telephone records "private"? Are they "protected"? I'm no lawyer, but this sure does seem to blow the lid off of the MSM's rank duplicity on the NSA's monitoring programs.
U.S. Supreme Court SMITH v. MARYLAND, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) 442 U.S. 735
SMITH v. MARYLAND. CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND.
No. 78-5374.
Argued March 28, 1979. Decided June 20, 1979.
The telephone company, at police request, installed at its central offices a pen register to record the numbers dialed from the telephone at petitioner's home. Prior to his robbery trial, petitioner moved to suppress "all fruits derived from" the pen register. The Maryland trial court denied this motion, holding that the warrantless installation of the pen register did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Petitioner was convicted, and the Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed.
Held:
The installation and use of the pen register was not a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and hence no warrant was required. Pp. 739-746.
(a) Application of the Fourth Amendment depends on whether the person invoking its protection can claim a "legitimate expectation of privacy" that has been invaded by government action. This inquiry normally embraces two questions: first, whether the individual has exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy; and second, whether his expectation is one that society is prepared to recognize as "reasonable." Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 . Pp. 739-741.
(Excerpt) Read more at caselaw.lp.findlaw.com ...
Yeah, well, personally I don't like it. The federal government has absolutely no business with my call records. It is none of their business. What makes me even madder is people that say you don't have freedom if you're dead. I'd rather live free or kill me because this country becomes no better than a third rate dictatorship without our freedom. And yes, I do have a God-given right to privacy from the federal government.
How the hell can one be a conservative and say its ok for the federal government to be in your business? Talk about rubber band politics. Just snap any which way the federal government says to. Count me out on this one.
I'm pretty certain that's how the programs would work, and why they are perfectly legal.
7-8-9-10. You're out.
The question is whether or not the NSA, AT&T, Bellsouth and Verizon complied with the legal requirements. I am not an expert on the matters of intelligence surveillance law, but I suspect the story has merit. Qwest declined the opportunity to cooperate with the NSA because the company believed that the legal requirements to do so have not been met.
Considering that their statements of even the facts of the issue are usually wrong that would be a big YES.
You're not important enough for them to care about your call records, unless you're communicating with al Qaeda.
Don't worry, they probably don't care about you at all.
you are attempting to outwit the Media Czar with facts. may your tribe increase.
The government has access to everything about you. They know your tax status, what vehicles you own, etc.
If you get on an airplane they search you and your belongings.
Get over it!!
I am getting darn sick and tired of the media (FOX included) stating or implying that the feds are recording or listening in on conversations.
Common sense shows that if everyone made one 5 minute call/day, that would be 1.5 billion minutes of talk. How many trained CIA grunts would it take to listen? Would the CIA grunts listen to their own calls?
None and no.
Because that duty is assigned to Dick Cheney. He personally screened every conversation today between every American and their mother while hunkered down in the bunker occasionally taking pot shots at underlings for his amusement.
If the Dems and the MSM had their way, you would be in jail for violating your kids expectation of privacy! Ridiculus!
Since then Congress passed the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) in 1984, requires law enforcement to get a warrant to use a pen register, though it appears to have made it extremely easy to get such a warrant.
Telecommunications Act of 1996, section 222 requires telephone companies to not disclose Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI) except in very limited circumstances.
It appears to me that the information these companies provided to the NSA falls under the definition of CPNI, and I don't see any exclusions that would allow them to simply give this information to the NSA.
The ECPA appears to make this Supreme Court decision meaningless because Congress added protections which created the reasonable expectation of privacy that was missing when they ruled on this case.
You can argue that these records are different than a pen register, but they also appear to be protected under the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
Then there's the issue of contractual agreements between the phone company and their customers. For example, this is taken from my customer agreement with Verizon Wireless.
Your Privacy ∞ We have a duty under federal law to protect the confidentiality of information about the quantity, technical configuration, type, destination, and amount of your use of our service, together with similar information on your bills. (This doesn't include your name, address, and wireless phone number.) Except as provided in this agreement, we won't intentionally share personal information about you without your permission. We may use and share information about you: (a) so we can provide our goods or services; (b) so others can provide goods or services to us, or to you on our behalf; (c) so we or our affiliates can communicate with you about goods or services related to the ones you already receive (although you can call us any time if you don't want us to do this); (d) to protect ourselves; or (e) as required by law, legal process, or exigent circumstances. In addition, you've authorized us to investigate your credit history at any time and to share credit information about you with credit reporting agencies. If you ask, we'll tell you the name and address of any credit agency that gives us a credit report about you. It's illegal for unauthorized people to intercept your calls, but such interceptions can occur. For training or quality assurance, we may also monitor or record our calls with you.
I'm not really opposed to this NSA program. However, I'm not convinced that the NSA has gone about this legally.
I'm definitely not happy with the idea that the phone company I've entered into a contractual agreement with would violate that agreement without being legally compelled to do so.
well, got that part right
Where have you been for the past dozen years?
LOL = good one
later read
That changed with the Electronic Communications Privacy Act in 1984, which was in response to Smith vs. Maryland.
Additional protections on the privacy of such information are included in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, section 222.
I'm uncomfortable with what this NSA program does, but I can understand the need and the benefit. I don't really oppose the program, but I'm not convinced the NSA implemented it legally.
They are NOT listening to your phone calls, they only sort through the numbers, and if one of them turns out to be a known Al Qaeda number, THEN they take a second look at the person who has been calling Al Qaeda.
God given' right to privacy?
Odd... the only ones who scream this nonsense hysterically are drug dealers and users, abortionists and you.
Nowhere in the common bibles or in our constitution is there a mention of "God given right to privacy".
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong...
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.