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

United States Files Civil Lawsuit Against Edward Snowden

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 501 posts

Re: United States Files Civil Lawsuit Against Edward Snowden

#431

Post by vinceguidry »

cwkoss wrote: post #427
vinceguidry wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not true. This is something I had to learn from people that have been in high-level roles in government. I will start with the history and purpose of constitutions. General guidelines to organize and plan governments around have existed since time immemorial. What makes modern constitutions special is that it specifies the idea of popular sovereignty , that it is the entirety of the population of a nation that…

I fundamentally disagree that secrecy is the foundation of national security. Journalists have revealed state secrets countless times, and over and over the secret was kept to hide unjustifiable actions of government officials violating their oath of office and taking actions which harm national interests. There is a role for keeping certain information temporarily secret (i.e. don't publish where the active missile…

The state of journalism in any particular country is a very good cue to start with when trying to figure out the exact level of civilization present. Journalists not only have to be authorized by states to operate, but they must also be protected by those same states. This is the case in most countries except for exceedingly advanced ones, such as the US and most of Europe, where they can be allowed a great deal of autonomy.

Re: United States Files Civil Lawsuit Against Edward Snowden

#434

Post by Tepix »

bb88 wrote: post #32
HashThis wrote: post #21

This is the "It is illegal to inform the citizen base that the government has removed their constitutional right" lawsuit. The NSA and FBI removed every US citizen of their constitutional right, to privacy. Edward Snowden informed the US citzen base on their constitutional rights being removed. This lawsuit is the government saying it is illegal for any US citizen to inform all other citizens when the government remo…

Rightly or wrongly, that is not a part of the SF86 form when one applies for a clearance. The SF86 form offers no leeway for moral objections. So in such a scenario, it would be better to not submit the SF86 form in the first place. The only people I'm aware of that can publish classified information without punishment are journalists.

> The only people I'm aware of that can publish classified information without punishment are journalists.

POTUS can also do it.

Re: United States Files Civil Lawsuit Against Edward Snowden

#435

Post by thathndude »

Tepix wrote: post #433

If you're afraid that the US government and not Edward Snowden will receive the proceeds of the book you purchase, you can also make a donation to Ed's legal defense fund at https://edwardsnowden.com/en/donate/

He should give it away for free with a strongly encouraged donation.

Re: United States Files Civil Lawsuit Against Edward Snowden

#436

Post by downandout »

HashThis wrote: post #21

This is the "It is illegal to inform the citizen base that the government has removed their constitutional right" lawsuit. The NSA and FBI removed every US citizen of their constitutional right, to privacy. Edward Snowden informed the US citzen base on their constitutional rights being removed. This lawsuit is the government saying it is illegal for any US citizen to inform all other citizens when the government remo…

This is the "It is illegal to inform the citizen base that the government has removed their constitutional right" lawsuit.

While I applaud what Snowden did, the issue in this case is quite a bit different than what you have portrayed here. The issue is whether or not he violated the terms of his NDA. And of course he did, in a gigantic and very public way, and then admitted it and has given many speeches about doing it, wrote a book about it, and had a movie created portraying it.

Sadly, this is an open and shut case. I am not even sure why he would defend it though, as the case is a “Grenada” [1] and a judgment from a US court will have zero effect on him while living in Russia.

[1] https://youtu.be/5yhxTyYEF9s?t=24s

Re: United States Files Civil Lawsuit Against Edward Snowden

#437

Post by mcv »

clSTophEjUdRanu wrote: post #325
cmiles74 wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what you get when whistleblowers have no protections. If we don't want to see this happen again in the future, the answer is to protect people coming forward with information about abuses.

Whistleblowers do have protections. I was just looking this up the other day- there are proper ways to report this even for matters that deal with classified information. He didn't do that. https://www.dodig.mil/Components/Administrative-Investigatio...

He didn't do that because it doesn't work. Snowden was not the first to address these issues. He's just was the first who had some effect in addressing these issues, because he ignored the official routes. Those who used the 'proper ways' either got nowhere or had their lives destroyed (like with Thomas Drake).

Re: United States Files Civil Lawsuit Against Edward Snowden

#438

Post by ummwhat »

bb88 wrote: post #42
excalibur wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try the 4th Amendment: > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

If you're an originalist (and I'm not saying that I am), data in transmit is not necessarily protected by that amendment If your data has left your house, is it really your data, or is it Google's say?

The answer is yes it is still your data. There are relevant supreme Court precedents which resolve this unambiguously. Hence why you need a warrant to tap a phone line instead of just claiming "it's the phone companies signal".

Re: United States Files Civil Lawsuit Against Edward Snowden

#439

Post by Rapzid »

excalibur wrote: post #25
HashThis wrote: post #21

This is the "It is illegal to inform the citizen base that the government has removed their constitutional right" lawsuit. The NSA and FBI removed every US citizen of their constitutional right, to privacy. Edward Snowden informed the US citzen base on their constitutional rights being removed. This lawsuit is the government saying it is illegal for any US citizen to inform all other citizens when the government remo…

Exactly. Where is the accountability for the government officials who deprived us of our rights in the first place? There's been none. They made a few perfunctory gestures toward self-control, and kept right on violating the Constitution in the same ways under programs with new names.

Well we got close untill the heads of the intelligence agencies lied to Congress.. Drat, I guess they were too slippery for us this time!

Re: United States Files Civil Lawsuit Against Edward Snowden

#440

Post by mattkrause »

txcwpalpha wrote: post #276
mattkrause wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're making this way more mysterious-sounding than it is. As the text says, those first categories are INTENDED for sealed letters. Things shipped in those ways therefore retain the privacy protections of letters. You can put a (small) rock or whatever in there instead--that's your business--and if you do, the Post Office will never know because they're applying the letter-privacy standard and not looking inside. T…

That simply isn't the case though. First Class Mail (and Priority Mail) are specifically intended for both "letters" as well as "things". A glance at the USPS website shows this. Indeed, even in the CFR you quoted, it specifically mentions certain types of "package" services as sealed mail. I don't know where you're getting that there is a specific "intention" for anything.

It’s literally what the CFR says: “maintained...for the transmission of letters sealed against inspection.” The word “for” clearly means “intended for” or “for the purposes of.”

You can put whatever you want in a priority mail envelope, but the size and weight limits are much more suited to a big document than an engine block.

Post reply on HN