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

U.S. NSA domestic phone spying program illegal: appeals court

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 146 posts

Re: U.S. NSA domestic phone spying program illegal: appeals court

#51

Post by primroot »

wehadfun wrote: post #36
toyg wrote: post #29

Now it would be the right time to ask for a presidential pardon for Edward Snowden. Now that candidates are gearing up their campaign platforms, it would be a great vote winner both on the left and on the (libertarian) right. If you live in a "defining primary" state, please go and ask the candidates as soon as they show up.

We may be glad with what he did but do we want to encourage this type of thing? I think quietly "being nice" to him is fine but a public pardon, a welcome hope party, adoring media coverage may inspire some idiot to be the next Snowden and we probably do not want that.

"We" is too many people.

Re: U.S. NSA domestic phone spying program illegal: appeals court

#52

Post by msandford »

chippy wrote: post #45
wehadfun wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We may be glad with what he did but do we want to encourage this type of thing? I think quietly "being nice" to him is fine but a public pardon, a welcome hope party, adoring media coverage may inspire some idiot to be the next Snowden and we probably do not want that.

>do we want to encourage this type of thing? Whistleblowing?

As far as I can tell he did it exactly right. Tried to escalate but not the point of causing trouble and getting fired. Took a bunch of documents and released them not straight out, but to journalists who had an opportunity to redact things that might directly endanger lives (like names of agents, etc).

> do we want to encourage this type of thing?

So long as the government tries to do things in secret that are illegal, yes, we do want to encourage this type of thing. The alternative is that eventually you have "turn key tyranny" where the apparatus is also used to suppress dissent and the government REALLY takes over.

Re: U.S. NSA domestic phone spying program illegal: appeals court

#53

Post by Pyxl101 »

pcrh wrote: post #33
rev_bird wrote: post #8

Is it weird that anti-surveillance court rulings don't really make me feel better? If they'd not only lie to Congress, but ACTUALLY SPY ON Congress, what is a judge going to do to stop them?

The difference isn't so much whether they conduct surveillance, within or on the edges of the law, but whether they can use whatever information they find. If the information that is found cannot subsequently be used to (legally) further whatever agenda they have, then it is of very much diminished value, and its collection will receive less support. Small steps...

That's not the only issue. Parallel construction is also a concern - a process where the government "launders" information received unconstitutionally, such as lying and claiming it was from a confidential informant; or using the illegally received information to give them insight into how to pursue building a "clean" line of evidence that appears to be from scratch but isn't, such as "coincidentally" stopping a particular vehicle for a traffic violation, when investigators know the vehicle will be breaking the law from their dragnet surveillance (e.g., smuggling drugs). In some cases, these agencies have lied to the courts about how they obtained their evidence.

> But instead of being truthful with criminal defendants, judges, and even prosecutors about where the information came from, DEA agents are reportedly obscuring the source of these tips. For example, a law enforcement agent could receive a tip from SOD—which SOD, in turn, got from the NSA—to look for a specific car at a certain place. But instead of relying solely on that tip, the agent would be instructed to find his or her own reason to stop and search the car. Agents are directed to keep SOD under wraps and not mention it in "investigative reports, affidavits, discussions with prosecutors and courtroom testimony," according to Reuters.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intel...

Re: U.S. NSA domestic phone spying program illegal: appeals court

#54

Post by task_queue »

rev_bird wrote: post #8

Is it weird that anti-surveillance court rulings don't really make me feel better? If they'd not only lie to Congress, but ACTUALLY SPY ON Congress, what is a judge going to do to stop them?

It's okay. A good portion of the justice system is in cahoots with investigators' tactics because it puts people they believe are guilty behind bars.

Re: U.S. NSA domestic phone spying program illegal: appeals court

#56

Post by a3n »

mikecb wrote: post #46
a3n wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the words of 4th amendment jurisprudence, we don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy in items we voluntarily disclose to third parties. I would hope that thinking on this evolves, to the point that we have a reasonable expectation that information we've voluntarily disclosed to a third party stays between us and that third party. Because that is exactly my personal expectation, notwithstanding my other ex…

Mosaic theory doesn't go that far, but in the age of widespread statistical inference, it is an important development. Generally speaking, the public is entitled to all evidence. Certain rights, such as the Fifth amendment, protect you from being compelled to testify against yourself, but you have no right to prevent, nor does anyone else have the right to refuse, to testify against or about you, except for a very sm…

But the 4th does qualify with "unreasonable," and dragnets without "specific" suspicions are unreasonable and unconstitutional.

Re: U.S. NSA domestic phone spying program illegal: appeals court

#57

Post by scott_karana »

wehadfun wrote: post #36
toyg wrote: post #29

Now it would be the right time to ask for a presidential pardon for Edward Snowden. Now that candidates are gearing up their campaign platforms, it would be a great vote winner both on the left and on the (libertarian) right. If you live in a "defining primary" state, please go and ask the candidates as soon as they show up.

We may be glad with what he did but do we want to encourage this type of thing? I think quietly "being nice" to him is fine but a public pardon, a welcome hope party, adoring media coverage may inspire some idiot to be the next Snowden and we probably do not want that.

Unlike the arguable Manning, Snowden had a deliberate, slow, controlled release of information. No informants were exposed; et cetera.

What is wrong with responsible whistleblowing of unlawful activity? I think it should be encouraged!

Re: U.S. NSA domestic phone spying program illegal: appeals court

#58

Post by a3n »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #50
a3n wrote: post #9

I'm sure the NSA is laughing at the judge and his decision. "How many divisions does he have? Bwa-ha-ha-ha." https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin

NSA employees go home at night. They are subject to arrest when they do, if the courts need to go that far.

How would you know who they are? I think their govt IDs identify them as DoD employees, not specifically NSA.

Re: U.S. NSA domestic phone spying program illegal: appeals court

#60

Post by ganeumann »

kylelibra wrote: post #12

Here's the actual decision: http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/NSA_ca2_20150507.pdf Concurrence by Judge Sack: https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/clap... Here's what struck me as the most interesting comment from Sack - "Considering the issue of advocacy in the context of deliberations involving alleged state secrets, and, more broadly, the ʺleakʺ by Edward Snowden that led to this litigation, calls…

Love the analysis of standing. The government said the ACLU did not have standing to sue because they could not demonstrate that their phone records, though collected, had been examined. The catch-22--that they never really would be able to because that's classified--was avoided by quoting the 4th Amendment:

"The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures" (italics in the original.)

Post reply on HN