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

Federal Judge Finds National Security Letters Unconstitutional, Bans Them

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 176 posts

Re: Federal Judge Finds National Security Letters Unconstitutional, Bans Them

#11

Post by Zimahl »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #5
koenigdavidmj wrote: post #2

If this was stayed to allow it to go to the circuit appeals court, does it only apply in the Ninth Circuit?

Yes, but hey once the Ninth Circuit throws it out Google and others might be able to plausibly claim[1] they are no longer bound by the gag orders. If it does get by the Ninth circuit then it will go to the Supreme court. Sadly the Supreme Court has been a bit to pro-government to my tastes lately. [1] Google claims their headquarters are in California, they also move all disputes into California, and so they could c…

Sadly the Supreme Court has been a bit to pro-government to my tastes lately.

I'd have to disagree. We've seen GPS tracking thrown out and other curbs on invasions of privacy. This court seems very interested in broadly defining privacy.

Re: Federal Judge Finds National Security Letters Unconstitutional, Bans Them

#14

Post by mtgx »

rayiner wrote: post #7
koenigdavidmj wrote: post #2

If this was stayed to allow it to go to the circuit appeals court, does it only apply in the Ninth Circuit?

If the 9th circuit upheld, then it would be binding in the 9th circuit, but persuasive in the other circuits if challenged on those grounds elsewhere.

So then we should hope this goes to the Supreme Court so it can be upheld there and applied everywhere? Or will most smaller courts apply it in other districts anyway, if the 9th Circuit upholds it?

Re: Federal Judge Finds National Security Letters Unconstitutional, Bans Them

#15

Post by rosser »

Zimahl wrote: post #11
ChuckMcM wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but hey once the Ninth Circuit throws it out Google and others might be able to plausibly claim[1] they are no longer bound by the gag orders. If it does get by the Ninth circuit then it will go to the Supreme court. Sadly the Supreme Court has been a bit to pro-government to my tastes lately. [1] Google claims their headquarters are in California, they also move all disputes into California, and so they could c…

Sadly the Supreme Court has been a bit to pro-government to my tastes lately. I'd have to disagree. We've seen GPS tracking thrown out and other curbs on invasions of privacy. This court seems very interested in broadly defining privacy.

Concur. As little as I'd have expected to be able to say this when some of the more recent sitting justices were appointed, I think this may be one of the best SCOTUS in recent memory to have such a case appear before them.

Re: Federal Judge Finds National Security Letters Unconstitutional, Bans Them

#16

Post by nmcfarl »

sp332 wrote: post #12

Anyone know which telco this really was?

The article says it’s likely Credo Mobile.

They're a fairly great little MVNO out of San Francisco. My wife, who is a customer, loves their customer service. And they’ve spoken out against the Patriot act - here’s tweet of theirs on the subject: https://twitter.com/CREDOMobile/status/4326145876

Re: Federal Judge Finds National Security Letters Unconstitutional, Bans Them

#18

Post by defen »

Zimahl wrote: post #11
ChuckMcM wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but hey once the Ninth Circuit throws it out Google and others might be able to plausibly claim[1] they are no longer bound by the gag orders. If it does get by the Ninth circuit then it will go to the Supreme court. Sadly the Supreme Court has been a bit to pro-government to my tastes lately. [1] Google claims their headquarters are in California, they also move all disputes into California, and so they could c…

Sadly the Supreme Court has been a bit to pro-government to my tastes lately. I'd have to disagree. We've seen GPS tracking thrown out and other curbs on invasions of privacy. This court seems very interested in broadly defining privacy.

IANAL but IIRC the GPS tracking was thrown out on narrow technical grounds - without a warrant the cops can't trespass upon your vehicle to install the tracker. They didn't say there was anything inherently wrong with the tracking itself. In other words, it would be just as illegal for the cops to surreptitiously attach an inert brick to your car without a warrant.

Re: Federal Judge Finds National Security Letters Unconstitutional, Bans Them

#20

Post by csense »

There's a lot of grousing in the tech community -- and HN in particular -- about all the threats to freedom, and for all the problems with the government's responses to current issues like new technologies or terrorism.

There's legitimate substance here, but occasionally, the system actually works exactly the way it's supposed to -- the judicial branch both asserting its independence from the executive and striking down an overreaching action by the latter.

In the actual ruling [1], the judge provides a very apt quotation from another case: "Under no circumstances should the Judiciary become the handmaiden of the Executive." This is particularly important in matters of national security. The tendency is for the executive branch to say the magic words "national security" if those words tend to cause other people to let them do whatever they want.

EDIT: Actually link to the ruling

[1] https://www.eff.org/document/nsl-ruling-march-14-2013

Post reply on HN