Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

midnight

(26,624 posts)
Wed Jun 19, 2013, 08:17 AM Jun 2013

"unprecedented surveillance strikes at the core of our right to free speech"-ACLU sues...

This unprecedented surveillance strikes at the core of our right to free speech, association, and privacy. On June 10, 2013, the ACLU filed a motion with the FISA Court seeking the release of its secret opinions that enable the mass acquisition of phone records. The next day, we filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the phone tracking program. Read on to learn more about the program and what we’re doing to stop it.

http://www.aclu.org/nsa-surveillance

Congress may have signed this into law, but ACLU is going to challenge it..

"The ACLU's complaint filed today explains that the dragnet surveillance the government is carrying out under Section 215 infringes upon the ACLU's First Amendment rights, including the twin liberties of free expression and free association. The nature of the ACLU's work—in areas like access to reproductive services, racial discrimination, the rights of immigrants, national security, and more—means that many of the people who call the ACLU wish to keep their contact with the organization confidential. Yet if the government is collecting a vast trove of ACLU phone records—and it has reportedly been doing so for as long as seven years—many people may reasonably think twice before communicating with us.

The kind of personal-data aggregation accomplished through Section 215 also constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment. Last year, in a case on GPS tracking by police, five members of the Supreme Court indicated support for the common-sense notion that government collection of individual bits of seemingly innocuous personal information over a long period of time could amount to such a complete invasion of privacy that it would be unconstitutional. The surveillance program that came to light with the release of the FISC order constitutes precisely that kind of unreasonable incursion into Americans' private lives.

Finally, the ACLU's complaint charges that the executive branch's use of Section 215 violates the plain language of the statute itself. The statute requires that records seized under its authority be "relevant" to an authorized foreign-intelligence or terrorism investigation. But while that language imposes a real limitation on when the government can use Section 215, the FISC order covering all VBNS customers demonstrates that this "relevance" restraint is shockingly inadequate. Similarly, the FISC order shows that the government—with the FISC's secret approval—is acquiring future records of telephone subscribers based on the same "relevance" requirement, even though the statute uses words that clearly show it was only meant to cover "tangible things" already in existence.


With today's lawsuit, the ACLU is now attacking Section 215 on three legal fronts: in our ongoing FOIA litigation seeking the government's secret interpretation of the law; in the FISA Court through yesterday's public-access motion; and now, in a constitutional lawsuit in federal court. When the government is claiming such chillingly expansive surveillance powers, it's all hands on deck. Stay tuned."

http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security-technology-and-liberty/aclu-files-lawsuit-

19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"unprecedented surveillance strikes at the core of our right to free speech"-ACLU sues... (Original Post) midnight Jun 2013 OP
The ACLU is racist! The Link Jun 2013 #1
And disidoro01 Jun 2013 #2
What? Malik Agar Jun 2013 #10
reference to some other threads burnodo Jun 2013 #14
Where would we be without the ACLU? pipoman Jun 2013 #3
Damn right, premium Jun 2013 #11
I heard about this, and donated immediately Savannahmann Jun 2013 #4
Thank you.... midnight Jun 2013 #7
Time to send more money to the ACLU hootinholler Jun 2013 #5
They're slurping up all of the data Hydra Jun 2013 #9
I've heard that, but I don't have evidence to confirm it hootinholler Jun 2013 #15
"Evidence" is a funny word Hydra Jun 2013 #16
Sorry, I was referring to the actual call data, the audio parts of the calls hootinholler Jun 2013 #17
I meant more than the metadata too Hydra Jun 2013 #18
They will lose. Major Hogwash Jun 2013 #6
Are you cheering for the 1st and 4th amendments to be gutted? n/t Hydra Jun 2013 #8
Bravo for the ACLU and the 4th Amendment they're protecting. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #12
I just returned home from running some errands. Savannahmann Jun 2013 #13
Love the reference to security agencies acting like a cloaking device, hiding it's true size and midnight Jun 2013 #19
 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
4. I heard about this, and donated immediately
Wed Jun 19, 2013, 08:36 AM
Jun 2013

Every month I set aside a small amount for political/charitable causes. I emptied the account and sent it to the ACLU.

hootinholler

(26,449 posts)
5. Time to send more money to the ACLU
Wed Jun 19, 2013, 09:03 AM
Jun 2013

I wonder what they will think when it's proven that actual phone calls are being slurped up in the event the gubmint wants to know what someone said 6 or 7 years ago.

Hydra

(14,459 posts)
9. They're slurping up all of the data
Wed Jun 19, 2013, 02:20 PM
Jun 2013

But yes, it should be interesting to see if it leads to outrage overload or "meh"

Either way, it's illegal.

hootinholler

(26,449 posts)
15. I've heard that, but I don't have evidence to confirm it
Wed Jun 19, 2013, 03:45 PM
Jun 2013

I think it depends on the semantic mood the Supremes are in as to its legality. If you record a wiretap, but never listen to the content, is it actually a wiretap? If the answer is no, then a slurp and burp program is legal.

Hydra

(14,459 posts)
16. "Evidence" is a funny word
Wed Jun 19, 2013, 04:06 PM
Jun 2013

They've said they are doing it. We've had corroborating leaks and the technology is certainly there. All we have is their word that they are following the law.

But no, unless either of us walks into an NSA data center and pushes a button and pulls up the full dosier of someone they don't have a specific warrant for, we don't have any "evidence."

But all of the circumstantial and several witnesses say, "Yes they can, and they are."

And btw, I think we can safely assume they're reading all of the data, and it's not under any particular lock and key...after all, the people supposed to being overseeing it apparently aren't much bothered by the (il)legality of it.

hootinholler

(26,449 posts)
17. Sorry, I was referring to the actual call data, the audio parts of the calls
Wed Jun 19, 2013, 04:32 PM
Jun 2013

Not just the metadata.

I've heard they are recording it all including the audio, but I haven't seen that from a relatively reliable source.

Hydra

(14,459 posts)
18. I meant more than the metadata too
Wed Jun 19, 2013, 04:50 PM
Jun 2013

They have all of our data being gathered. Net traffic, phone calls, mail, bank accounts/transactions, GPS via cell phones and when they need to, actually physical monitoring.

Proving all of this is difficult though, beyond statements they give and leaks we have. If I walked into one of their data collection centers, I'd be shot. That in itself tells you how far this goes and how little control over it anyone has.

 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
12. Bravo for the ACLU and the 4th Amendment they're protecting.
Wed Jun 19, 2013, 02:46 PM
Jun 2013

Unlike most of our "leaders" who are too busy trying to cover their asses with craven speeches about a "balance" between freedom and a police state.

 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
13. I just returned home from running some errands.
Wed Jun 19, 2013, 03:15 PM
Jun 2013

This takes time in Rural Georgia, nothing is close by. So you plan your trips out, to make maximum efficient use of the trips. While I was driving, I was considering, among other things, this issue.

The people I campaigned for, argued with neighbors and friends in favor of, who were elected, and swore an oath to support and defend the constitution are telling me that they are struggling to maintain a balance between national security, and those pesky civil rights. While on the other hand, a group of lawyers, elected by nobody, who's only oath is to fight for their clients to the best of their ability, are fighting for me.

The thing that struck me is one wants my donations, and my vote, and repays me by telling me not to worry, they are on top of this whole NSA spying thing, and nothing to see here, move along, go back to your home. I keep waiting for them to tell me that the roast is burning in my oven.

The other group asks for donations, and takes that money and actually challenges the status quo (Defined as the mess we're in right now) and points out that the constitution prohibits such things. How much easier would it be for the ACLU to go along, just get along and not worry about such things. Instead, they take on a high profile case, knowing that the parties will unite against them. Democrats (DINO really) will join hands with Republicans to make sure the spying continues.

Such an array of political power would certainly daunt lesser beings. I wouldn't blame them for being wary, because they are taking on so much power it is unbelievable. The NSA faces losing it's ability to spy, the FBI risks losing it's ability to keep tabs on enemies, Democrats and Republicans risk losing their ability to track their political enemies, Security Consulting Companies risk losing hugely profitable contracts. All because a handful of lawyers say that this is wrong, and are willing to take the risk to try and fight it.

The Bible tells the story of David versus Goliath. If there was ever a modern analogy, this is certainly it. Goliath is not just big, but enormous. National Security acts like a cloaking device, hiding it's true size and reach. If you thought the Military Industrial Complex was difficult to fight, wait until the Security Industrial Complex feels threatened.

midnight

(26,624 posts)
19. Love the reference to security agencies acting like a cloaking device, hiding it's true size and
Sun Jun 23, 2013, 04:31 PM
Jun 2013

reach.. Thanks for this great analogy...

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"unprecedented surveillan...