Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 493 posts

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#81

Post by ed25519FUUU »

krapp wrote: post #64
ed25519FUUU wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What updates does the US constitution need? I think if we were to rewrite it today it would become largely the same, maybe with a footer that says “and this time we really mean it”

It's an eighteenth century document that can be maddeningly vague at times. A lot of people (on HN at least) seem to think it's a problem that the First Amendment only applies to Congress, letting companies like Google or Facebook censor speech as much as they like. The Second Amendment isn't even written in complete sentences, and we need a room full of scholars to figure out just what exactly they meant by "A well…

> Maybe we don't need the Electoral College?

As someone who designs distributed systems for a living, I can say very confidently that the electorate system is a very good idea indeed.

Why risk the entire system if a single small part is corrupted?

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#82

Post by _8j50 »

outside1234 wrote: post #63
_8j50 wrote: post #6

You know what I don't get? There is no penalty for violating the highest law of the land (the constitution). How is it anymore than a suggestion or a guidline if government officials are not punished for violating it? And that is exactly how lae enforcement and intelligence community treat it. The US constitution needs lots of updates but this maybe the most important item -- manadatory prison terms for anyone acting…

VOTING is the penalty for many of these transgressions...

Voting gets the violators out of office (rarely works, but let's say it does) but it does not punish them for their explicit malicious violation of the law.

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#83

Post by _8j50 »

R0b0t1 wrote: post #13
_8j50 wrote: post #6

You know what I don't get? There is no penalty for violating the highest law of the land (the constitution). How is it anymore than a suggestion or a guidline if government officials are not punished for violating it? And that is exactly how lae enforcement and intelligence community treat it. The US constitution needs lots of updates but this maybe the most important item -- manadatory prison terms for anyone acting…

It is impossible to hold civil servants accountable at all levels of government. As long as you believe you were operating within the law, regardless of if you were or not and what effect that may have had on other people, you seem to be unapproachable. Eventually this is going to lead to civil servants being lynched.

If you have a signed confession and video recording of civil servants intentionally violating the law, should they not be punished?

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#84

Post by benrbray »

ColanR wrote: post #78
ardy42 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know what I don't get? There is no penalty for violating the highest law of the land (the constitution). How is it anymore than a suggestion or a guidline if government officials are not punished for violating it? And that is exactly how lae enforcement and intelligence community treat it. It's because it can't reasonably work like that. At a certain point, defining punishments is moot, because there's no highe…

> because there's no higher authority to appeal to for enforcement Technically, that higher authority is the people themselves. Bear in mind that the Constitution was written in a context where the governed people successfully held their government accountable at the business end of their hunting rifles.

Violence is a last resort, but it shouldn't be the ONLY resort when government violates our rights.

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#85

Post by krapp »

ColanR wrote: post #78
ardy42 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know what I don't get? There is no penalty for violating the highest law of the land (the constitution). How is it anymore than a suggestion or a guidline if government officials are not punished for violating it? And that is exactly how lae enforcement and intelligence community treat it. It's because it can't reasonably work like that. At a certain point, defining punishments is moot, because there's no highe…

> because there's no higher authority to appeal to for enforcement Technically, that higher authority is the people themselves. Bear in mind that the Constitution was written in a context where the governed people successfully held their government accountable at the business end of their hunting rifles.

>Bear in mind that the Constitution was written in a context where the governed people successfully held their government accountable at the business end of their hunting rifles.

No they didn't, look up Shay's Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion as examples. The US government has never been successfully "held accountable" at gunpoint.

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#86

Post by macspoofing »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #43
macspoofing wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It seems to me that just the pardon power by itself is fundamentally incompatible with democracy and the rule of law. Says who? And why? >I imagine that if we can survive and progress long enough to have real democracy and rule of law Why do you want 'real' democracy? What makes you think that getting rid of other non-democratic institutions, like Congress, like the Presidency, and institute Athenian-style mob rule…

> but do you honestly think your life would be better if this particular, and relatively minor, aspect of the Presidency would be curtailed? Why even bother saying this? Each of us can want / advocate for whatever changes each of us prefers in any given moment. There's plenty of resources in the world, and within each of us, to want better for, say, our kids; more space exploration; a presidential role with fewer per…

>Each of us can want / advocate for whatever changes each of us prefers in any given moment.

I understand that. I'm saying you need a reason to go through the effort of changing the constitution and a 240 year old tradition. This is why I asked what all that effort in getting rid of the pardon would do for the world. And it seems, the answer is not much if anything at all. So my argument is, maybe find something more worthwhile to concern yourself with?

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#87

Post by [deleted] »

dimitrios1 wrote: post #14
_8j50 wrote: post #6

You know what I don't get? There is no penalty for violating the highest law of the land (the constitution). How is it anymore than a suggestion or a guidline if government officials are not punished for violating it? And that is exactly how lae enforcement and intelligence community treat it. The US constitution needs lots of updates but this maybe the most important item -- manadatory prison terms for anyone acting…

Maybe some laws just don't have penalties? Having laws with no penalties is rather common. https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/26724/what-is-t...

[deleted]

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#88

Post by ardy42 »

DennisP wrote: post #70
ardy42 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know what I don't get? There is no penalty for violating the highest law of the land (the constitution). How is it anymore than a suggestion or a guidline if government officials are not punished for violating it? And that is exactly how lae enforcement and intelligence community treat it. It's because it can't reasonably work like that. At a certain point, defining punishments is moot, because there's no highe…

Seems like the courts could make a distinction between "ok this was unclear" and "this was obvious, egregious and deserving of penalties." And while throwing Congress in jail seems unworkable, disqualifying members from reelection in egregious cases might be doable (though of course it would require a constitutional amendment).

> And while throwing Congress in jail seems unworkable, disqualifying members from reelection in egregious cases might be doable (though of course it would require a constitutional amendment).

I don't think so. Do you really want the executive and the courts be able to disqualify representatives, essentially for political reasons, because they proposed legislation or supported legislation that a president has signed into law?

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#89

Post by heimatau »

ardy42 wrote: post #54
_8j50 wrote: post #6

You know what I don't get? There is no penalty for violating the highest law of the land (the constitution). How is it anymore than a suggestion or a guidline if government officials are not punished for violating it? And that is exactly how lae enforcement and intelligence community treat it. The US constitution needs lots of updates but this maybe the most important item -- manadatory prison terms for anyone acting…

> You know what I don't get? There is no penalty for violating the highest law of the land (the constitution). How is it anymore than a suggestion or a guidline if government officials are not punished for violating it? And that is exactly how lae enforcement and intelligence community treat it. It's because it can't reasonably work like that. At a certain point, defining punishments is moot, because there's no highe…

> If the Constitution says "Congress shall make no law..." and Congress still makes a law, what are you going to do, throw Congress in jail? That's nonsense.

Actually, it's nonsense to think anything to the contrary. Either our founding document matters as the backbone of our Laws or it doesn't. Your outlandish logic nullifies any power that the government may have over it's people. It nullifies the social contract.

> The Constitution, for the most part, just states norms and procedures that the the country and government have decided to follow voluntarily, not because some authority will punish it if it doesn't.

It's not a document of 'norms' and 'procedures'. It's a structure of how our Republic is built. Either we have a structure or we undermine it. That's really it, full stop. Amendments are apart of that structure to build or take away for what that structure is to be. Not 'ought to be' not 'suggested' not 'maybe if you'd like to follow', it's a mutually agreed upon Law.

[edited: minor edits for added clarity]

Re: Ninth Circuit rules NSA's bulk collection of Americans' call records was illegal

#90

Post by pmiller2 »

kmlx wrote: post #45
ironmagma wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are objectively an oligarchy; there's no other explanation that makes sense.

objectively your post is false. the US has a flawed democracy, but a democracy nonetheless: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index consider the rest of the countries in that list

A state can be both a de facto oligarchy and a flawed democracy. Thus, your comment does nothing to rebut the GP assertion.
Post reply on HN