Skip to comments.
Judge: NSA phone program likely unconstitutional
politico.com ^
| 12/16/13
| JOSH GERSTEIN
Posted on 12/16/2013 11:28:36 AM PST by ColdOne
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
To: ColdOne
Where is the US House on IMPEACHMENT? That is just a rhetorical question.
21
posted on
12/16/2013 12:06:34 PM PST
by
Cheerio
(Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
To: ColdOne
This judge better hope he never did anything Illegal, Immoral or ‘I’mbarassing. If he did, the NSA will be showing him the evidence befoire the end of the day, and telling him that it will be made public if he doesn’t reverse his opinion.
To: ColdOne
Finally!
23
posted on
12/16/2013 12:16:41 PM PST
by
Red in Blue PA
(When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance Becomes Duty.-Thomas Jefferson)
To: ColdOne
Likely? Likely? Likely? Likely? Likely? Likely?
More like “MOST DEFINITELY”
24
posted on
12/16/2013 12:18:09 PM PST
by
GraceG
To: Cboldt
"So, the government gets around that by saying the NSA is not an investigating body. It merely gathers information. The investigators still need a warrant, but once they have the warrant, they can access the NSA database.
In theory, this should work just fine.
Even if the government doesn't collect this information, it doesn't change the fact that the information is still there to be collected by those that have the means to do so (i.e. corporations, or foreign governments).
NSA or not, there can be no expectation of privacy in an electronic communication of any kind.
25
posted on
12/16/2013 12:25:08 PM PST
by
indthkr
To: Logical me
There is very little Constitutional law left in America that the communists Democrats have not destroyed. Hey, it's not just the Democrats. The Republicans are in on it too.
![](http://www.political-humor.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/350x275xthe-bill-of-rights.jpg.pagespeed.ic.ZXRrqZiINc.jpg)
(I've seen one where "war on drugs" is replaced w/ "war on terror".)
26
posted on
12/16/2013 12:27:54 PM PST
by
OneWingedShark
(Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
To: Cboldt
So, the government gets around that by saying the NSA is not an investigating body. It merely gathers information. The investigators still need a warrant, but once they have the warrant, they can access the NSA database. The problem with that rationale is that using it they have a "information-gathering" crew could go into your house collect everything, have the investigation-crew talk to people and then have "suspicion of reasonable cause" wherewith to get a warrant and go through your things.
No good will come of this.
27
posted on
12/16/2013 12:31:26 PM PST
by
OneWingedShark
(Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
To: OneWingedShark
The only way it plays out is in court, usually on criminal charges. The judges then are pretty good about tossing evidence obtained without a warrant.
So, the practice of over-sampling (if you will) has no downside risk. None. The bootstrapping issue you raise doesn't exist for the investigators. They have to have suspicion before they can access your NSA file, and armed with suspicion, they can easily get a warrant.
28
posted on
12/16/2013 12:36:10 PM PST
by
Cboldt
To: lee martell
Let’s say it is ruled unconstitutional, as it should be. How would we know the program has been stopped? Should we trust the same government that was spying on us illegally to dismantle their own program?
29
posted on
12/16/2013 12:46:42 PM PST
by
VA_Gentleman
("Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very internet you invented." -Jon Stewart)
Comment #30 Removed by Moderator
To: ColdOne
This is a District court decision. And the judge stayed the decision pending an appeal which will drag on for years.
31
posted on
12/16/2013 12:58:06 PM PST
by
RKBA Democrat
( There is no worst president but owebama, and valerie jarrett is his prophet.)
To: ColdOne
Impeachment File for for the 2014 Impeachment of B. Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, a documented legal citizen of the Sovereign Nation of Indonesia.
32
posted on
12/16/2013 1:04:02 PM PST
by
Graewoulf
(Democrats' Obamacare Socialist Health Insur. Tax violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
To: ColdOne
Finally, a judge who is doing his job.
To: ColdOne
The article made it a point to say that this had been going on for the past 7 years (gotta get the Bush admin in on this). But wasn’t the program more limited under the Bush admin? Didn’t they have to go to the FISA report and get a warrant to collect information about calls from SPECIFIC numbers, not a metadata collection?
34
posted on
12/16/2013 1:18:15 PM PST
by
Purrcival
(Four more years of OBAMA??????????? I hope this country can survive.)
To: LowTaxesEqualsProsperity
yep...a republican judge at that
To: Cboldt
“They have to have suspicion before they can access your NSA file”
Who is “they”? Snowden had access to all the data. Many others probably have access and are willing to sell it to the highest bidder. Then you also have hackers and corrupt politicians.
Never assume that a government program will work as it’s supposed to (ie. in compliance with the law). Because it never does.
To: ColdOne
So they’ll do it anyway.....
37
posted on
12/16/2013 1:40:34 PM PST
by
Tzimisce
To: OneWingedShark
This one is very, very close to the truth.
We are all being played.
38
posted on
12/16/2013 1:44:50 PM PST
by
zeugma
(Is it evil of me to teach my bird to say "here kitty, kitty"?)
To: indthkr; Cboldt
So, the government gets around that by saying the NSA is not an investigating body. It merely gathers information. The investigators still need a warrant, but once they have the warrant, they can access the NSA database. The Fourth Amendment is fairly comprehensive:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. My phone usage is under contract for me to have private conversations with persons of my choosing. those having the conversation or email have the reasonable expectation of privacy. If I keep a letter someone sent to me, those are MY papers. They are property. For the government to take possession of those records without a warrant is to SEIZE them, whether taken from me or the phone company. If they record my conversation, they have seized that too. Hence they need a warrant, and it had better not be a fishing license. What would be legal I suppose is for the phone company to be required to maintain the records to be available by warrant. Yet under no circumstances can I see how the NSA or any other agency can take possession of any private property without due process.
39
posted on
12/16/2013 1:51:11 PM PST
by
Carry_Okie
(0-Care IS Medicaid; they'll pull a sheet over your head and take everything you own to pay for it.)
To: ColdOne
"Judge: NSA phone program likely unconstitutional"![](https://scontent-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/302763_2539875792241_440949257_n.jpg)
40
posted on
12/16/2013 2:12:50 PM PST
by
Mad Dawgg
(If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson