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

211–220 of 493 posts

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

#211

Post by BoorishBears »

0xdde wrote: post #204
laughinghan wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused by your Bush and Obama references—both incidents occurred under Bush, the one that you attribute to Bush was revealed under Obama, whereas the one you attribute to Obama was revealed under Bush. Are you attributing based on occurrence or based on decision not to prosecute? Did you accidentally switch them?

Do you have some deeper point you're trying to get at? This sounds like a total nitpick, and I'm not sure where you're getting your erroneous corrections from. The illegal wire-tapping was a matter known to the public before Obama's time and there was a case brought by the EFF during the Bush years. The CIA torture comment most likely refers to the fact that a Senate report on CIA abuses was published during Obama's…

It is plain as day the current language in the comment is implying Obama was behind it. A clarification to that is pretty far from a nitpick.

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

#212

Post by nickff »

ndesaulniers wrote: post #198
chard_slicks_ wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will Clapper's perjury ever be punished?

I wonder if Clapper established that you could lie before US Congress without consequence, or if there are earlier instances?

A number of people have been convicted of perjury for lying to Congress.[1] Outside of Congress, Bill Clinton was known to have lied under oath (at a deposition) while in office, and was not thrown out of office.

[1] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/5-people-who-lied-...

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

#213

Post by yyyk »

laughinghan wrote: post #203
yyyk wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no choice in a democracy but to have something like the pardon power. The reason is that we need protection also from the power of judicial branch, which is abusable like any branch with power. Not having a pardon power allows bad judges to throw anyone they don't like into jail with no recourse by anyone. In a democracy, all branches are checked by the others, and this is a necessary check on the judicial br…

Not having a pardon power allows bad judges to throw anyone they don't like into jail with no recourse by anyone. Technically, all judges can be impeached, and all judges other than SCOTUS can be appealed (there's actually a specific writ you can file claiming to be jailed unjustly, habeas corpus). In practice, impeachment hasn't proven to be much of a check on judicial power (recall elections have probably been more…

Technically, all judges can be impeached, and all judges other than SCOTUS can be appealed (there's actually a specific writ you can file claiming to be jailed unjustly, habeas corpus).

This doesn't vacate the original judgement, which is nigh-unappealable if made by SCOTUS. There are also cases when impeachment isn't warranted but a pardon still makes sense (I gave examples in another post in the thread). I think adding checks on pardon power would be enough to deal with abuse of pardon. You're right this isn't a top priority.

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

#214

Post by laughinghan »

srtjstjsj wrote: post #196
Alupis wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What, specifically, would Trump require a pardon for? Being unlikable to some of the country?

Hatch Act violations, for starters.

The President and VP are specifically exempt from the Hatch Act: https://osc.gov/Services/Pages/HatchAct-Federal.aspx

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

#216

Post by xxpor »

zucker42 wrote: post #155
xxpor wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But courts don't pass laws, they interpret them. This is a common misconception. Courts don't pass statutes , but they certainly create law. Nearly every ruling from any sort of appeals court answers a question of law which is then binding on everyone under the jurisdiction of said court. This is the essential difference between a common law and civil law system. There are still rulings in the US that cite old Engli…

Sure, but it's irrelevant in this case because the Constitution prevents Congress and the states from passing an ex post facto law, not the courts from applying a new precedent to past events. I was just trying to argue that applying court decisions to events in the past doesn't violate the prohibition against ex post facto laws.

Yeah, I'm mostly being pedantic about one of my hobby horses.

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

#217

Post by xxpor »

r00fus wrote: post #129
xxpor wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But courts don't pass laws, they interpret them. This is a common misconception. Courts don't pass statutes , but they certainly create law. Nearly every ruling from any sort of appeals court answers a question of law which is then binding on everyone under the jurisdiction of said court. This is the essential difference between a common law and civil law system. There are still rulings in the US that cite old Engli…

Only in a country with jurisprudence. Not all countries hold that court decisions require following court decisions to respect previous decisions (ie, legal precedent).

See the common vs civil law comment at the end. No idea how the other major legal systems like sharia work though.

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

#218

Post by Proziam »

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.

The only nonsense is that we haven't done exactly that. If someone in power betrays the public trust they should be punished. The punishment ought to be severe so there is no doubt about the stakes at play.

> That might actually be unconstitutional ex-post-facto punishment.

We have members of our government who have taken oaths to other nations, and that have then voted to provide those other nations with aid and support. Similarly, we have members of our government who provide legal sanctuary for those who defy the laws of the land. And, regardless of your political beliefs, both parties currently in power have voted overwhelmingly in favor of war over the past several decades.

> Article III, section 3 of the U.S. Constitution: "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

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

#219

Post by cm2187 »

_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…

Including the second amendment

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

#220

Post by blondebelle »

Alupis wrote: post #77
jgust wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Throwing out a prediction: If the Biden/Harris ticket wins in 2020 and Trump is charged with anything, expect a pardon from the president. People will rage for a bit, get tired, run out of attention span, and move on to the next controversy.

What, specifically, would Trump require a pardon for? Being unlikable to some of the country?

We know you and yours are not asking in good faith, but for those who have had their heads in the sand or worse the last four years, here’s a partial list;

https://theintercept.com/2019/12/19/a-z-trump-impeachment/

Here is a take on a list of potential offenses over the last four WEEKS:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions...

Post reply on HN