Thursday, August 17, 2006

Judge Orders Halt to Warrantless Spying. Judge Orders Halt to Warrantless Spying. A federal judge in Detroit has ordered that the White House end the National Security Agency's controversial warrantless surveillance program. U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor found that the program violated the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), among other statutes. CDT has maintained that the warrantless surveillance program is illegal and undermines ordinary Americans' fundamental freedoms. CDT applauds the court for applying the law correctly and ordering that this dangerous, unnecessary program be stopped. [Center for Democracy and Technology] 6:50:49 PM

EFF - Judge Halts Warrantless Wiretapping Program. Judge Halts Warrantless Wiretapping Program. As reported by the AP, "A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government's warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it." The ACLU brought this lawsuit after the spying program was first disclosed. Read the judge's decision and injunction order. This is a huge victory in the fight to stop the government's massive and illegal surveillance. This ruling deals with the so-called "Terrorist Surveillance Program." EFF has sued AT&T for its role in the NSA's illegal spying, which we allege goes beyond what the President has directly admitted. Last month, Judge Walker rejected the government's motion to dismiss based on state secrets, along with AT&T's motion to dismiss, and allowed the case to go forward. Donate to support our case against AT&T, and tell Congress now to stop the surveillance bills. More news and analysis to follow during the day. [EFF: Deep Links] 6:40:39 PM

Momentous NSA Injuction: Experts' First Impressions. Momentous NSA Injuction: Experts' First Impressions. Thursday's decision by District Court Judge Anna Diggs Taylor to permanently stop the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program on the grounds it violates the Constitution is nearly unprecedented and "astoundingly brave," according to William Weaver, an expert on national security law who advises the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition. "There has never been a ruling like this regarding state secrets privilege. This is a ruling that stops a program that the executive branch says is critical to national security," Weaver said. "This is obviously is going to go to appeal and I assume the government is already writing an emergency appeal to get a stay to this injunction, which I imagine will happen," Weaver said. "This case will go to the Supreme Court." The only decision like it, according to Weaver, was a 1973 injunction from Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas that required the Nixon Administration to cease bombing Cambodia, which he considered to be illegal. That injunction lasted a mere six hours, until Douglas was overruled by Justice Thurgood Marshall. Weaver is not optimistic that the injunction will stand. "This ruling sets up showdown between the state secrets privilege and the Constitution, and we have seen in the past that state secrets wins." "The Supreme Court will take this opportunity to make a very clear statement about an expanded state secrets power. I hate to be so pessimistic, but the opinion in Tenet vs Doe was 9-0, and in that case, they said that sometimes the state secrets privilege should be more powerful." The Sixth Circuit will likely clear its calendar to set up a panel to hear the government's appeal. If they uphold the ruling, the Supreme Court will likely hear the case immediately, as they did in the famous Youngstown case, where President Harry Truman attempted to seize steel mills to end a labor dispute during the Korean War. Marc Rotenberg, the director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, was more optimistic about the ruling. The decision in Detroit today is a very important affirmation that the government must operate within rule of law. The key point here is that this a decision was made by the judiciary as to the legality of the NSA surveillance program. We have been through a very long period of time under which the White House, the Attorney General, the President and the newly-confirmed CIA Director Michael Hayden have, on their own basis, said they believe the NSA surveillance program was permissible. But the critical decision had to be made by a federal court, and at least the preliminary ruling by a federal court as to the unconstitutionality of the program reaffirms the importance of constitutional checks and balances. At this stage in the proceedings, this is good news for people who are concerned about privacy and appropriate restraints on government surveillance. [27B Stroke 6] 6:36:53 PM

Wired News: Judge Halts NSA Snooping The Bush administration's warrantless eavesdropping on Amercians' telephone and internet communications is unconstitutional and must stop immediately, a federal judge ruled Thursday. The ruling is the first court order barring the National Security Agency's ambitious domestic surveillance activities, which have spurred a string of lawsuits against the government and telecommunications companies around the country. It also marks a serious blow to the administration's sweeping interpretation of executive authority under the Constitution, a stance that's riled politicians and legal scholars alike. Detroit U.S. District Court judge Anna Diggs Taylor, presiding over an ACLU challenge to the so-called "Terrorist Surveillance Program", rejected(.pdf) the government's assertion that the state secrets privilege prevents any review of the NSA surveillance. In the past, the privilege has allowed the government to put an immediate stop to judicial proceedings that it says might reveal top national security secrets. But in this case, "the court is persuaded that Plaintiffs are able to establish a prima facie case based solely on Defendants' public admissions" regarding the NSA's warrantless wiretapping of Americans. The wiretapping "violates the Separation of Powers doctrine, the Administrative Procedures Act, the First and Fourth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and Title III (of the Constitution)," according to Taylor's injunction. "Today's ruling is a landmark victory against the abuse of power that has become the hallmark of the Bush administration," said ACLU Director Anthony D. Romero in a written statement. "Government spying on innocent Americans without any kind of warrant and without Congressional approval runs counter to the very foundations of our democracy." 6:34:47 PM

All Quiet at AT&T. All Quiet at AT&T. In the wake of Judge Taylor's ruling, I used my lunch break to walk down to AT&T's Folsom street switching center here in San Francisco. I was certain I'd find a dozen burly teamsters moving pallets of surveillance gear out the back door. The court's injunction was, after all, quite specific: anyone helping with the NSA's warrantless electronic surveillance must immediately and permanently cease and desist. According to whistleblower Mark Klein, AT&T has a whole room here on the sixth floor dedicated to piping tapped internet traffic to Ft. Meade, and now that the company isn't allowed to do that anymore you'd think it would want to promptly reclaim the space. And yet, not a sign. The loading dock was gated shut. There were a few vans parked in the lot, but they all had phone company logos, and we all know the NSA uses black vans with weird antennas on the roof. I'll check periodically, and start monitoring Craigslist for cut-rate Narus boxes and optical splitters. [27B Stroke 6] 6:30:16 PM

EFF Demands FTC Investigation and Privacy Reform After AOL Data Release. EFF Demands FTC Investigation and Privacy Reform After AOL Data Release. Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today asked [PDF] the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to investigate AOL and require changes in its privacy practices, after the company recently released search history logs that exposed the private lives of more than a half-million of its customers. EFF argues that the release of this data violated AOL's privacy policy and the Federal Trade Commission Act and should be investigated. EFF further requests that the FTC require AOL to notify customers affected by the disclosure and to stop logging search data except where absolutely necessary. Read the complaint here [PDF], and take action now to help protect privacy in your search queries. [EFF: Deep Links] 6:09:19 PM

EFF - CA Alert - Keep Privacy-Leaking Chips out of State ID! CA Alert - Keep Privacy-Leaking Chips out of State ID! We're close to a major victory in the battle to keep radio frequency identification (RFID) tags out of California IDs, but we need your help to finish the job. Without careful safeguards, RFIDs in IDs can broadcast your personal information to anyone nearby with cheap, readily-available equipment. Your government could be exposing you to the risk of covert tracking, stalking and identity theft. In California, EFF has been working with a diverse range of concerned groups to stop insecure ID cards. The result, S.B. 768, faces a vote next week in the Legislature before reaching the governor. (The bill has already passed the Senate once, though not in its amended form.) If you live in California, use our Action Center now to call your representatives and tell them to vote yes on SB 768. [EFF: Deep Links] 6:05:30 PM

US gets RFID passports. US gets RFID passports. Freedom fried The US Department of State has started issuing passports containing RFID chips and remains confident the technology "will take security and travel facilitation to a new level". [The Register - Internet and Law: Digital Rights/Digital Wrongs] 6:01:57 PM

© Copyright 2006 Paul Hardwick. Last update: 9/2/06; 4:25:32 AM.