Appeals Court Revives Lawsuit Challenging NSA Surveillance

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by nix, Mar 21, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. nix

    nix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Miami
  2. SteveTX

    SteveTX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    1,641
    Location:
    TX
    Second bite at the rotten apple.
     
  3. nix

    nix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Miami
    @SteveTX. That's for sure.
    http://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/safefree/faa_complaint_20080710.pdf
     
  4. SteveTX

    SteveTX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    1,641
    Location:
    TX
    Nix, what is your opinion regarding the "retroactive immunity" granted by the US against telecoms regarding civil and criminal culpability and remuneration? Is this an ex post facto law or does it not count in that regard?
     
  5. caspian

    caspian Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Posts:
    2,301
    Location:
    Oz
    LOL..that was funny but could not be more true.
     
  6. caspian

    caspian Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Posts:
    2,301
    Location:
    Oz
    That's a good question and I would like to know too. I was so frustrated and ~ Snipped as per TOS ~ about that.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 22, 2011
  7. nix

    nix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Miami
    This is an especially pernicious case, from beginning to end. In order to understand how and why retroactive immunity was granted to the telecommunications providers in the first place, it is necessary to start with Mike McConnell, a retired vice admiral and former NSA director. His resume then included a stint as director of defense programs at Booz Allen Hamilton. Tim Shorrock wrote this about him in 2007:
    http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/01/08/mcconnell/index.html

    When McConnell became DNI in 2007, he was instrumental in the implementation of the retroactive immunity provisions, despite his ties to the very industry he sought to protect:
    http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&gl=us&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.com

    Background aside, the granting of retroactive immunity does not automatically equate to an unconstitutional ex post facto legal maneuver. Clearly, in this case, the bigger issue has been standing. It is difficult to prove that one has been targeted for unconstitutional surveillance if evidence of the program itself does not officially exist, which is the case, for all intents, if the program is protected as a state secret. Without standing, there is no viable plaintiff, and the court cannot even reach any of the substantive issues. The case then becomes a Kafkaesque exercise of circular denial. In this case out of Manhattan, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the lower court's ruling, and ruled that the plaintiffs have a reasonable fear of being monitored. So this particular case against NSA will proceed, for now.
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2011
  8. chronomatic

    chronomatic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Posts:
    1,343
    This shouldn't even be a civil case, but a criminal investigation. As Nix mentioned, the ace in the hole the government always has to circumvent any type of oversight is the "state secrets" clause. This pretty much grants them immunity to any type of oversight by the courts and they have invoked it quite often in the last decade.
     
  9. nix

    nix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2010
    Posts:
    257
    Location:
    Miami
    Yes, and this isn't just any agency invoking state secrets. This is NSA, where mea culpa something looks like this:
    Keith Alexander

    Ah, yes. That’s worrisome...those mistakes...when and if they happen, with the vulnerabilities in code. And that thing that happens on the network when that happens.

    And, of course, Alexander is dual-hatted as both NSA Director and Commander, USCYBERCOM. So that self-reporting? He might have meant that literally ;)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.