General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSenator Leahy's statement on the President’s NSA reforms
(Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on Friday responded to President Obamas announcement that he will work with Congress to improve oversight of government surveillance programs. Leahy is the lead Democratic coauthor of the bipartisan USA FREEDOM Act, and earlier this week presided over a hearing featuring all five members of the Presidents Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies to discuss their recent recommendations to overhaul the governments surveillance authorities.)
I commend the President for taking important steps to maintain our national security while protecting privacy rights and civil liberties both here and abroad. The President is helping to restore the nations historic role as a beacon of individual freedoms, under the rule of law.
I am encouraged that the President has embraced the growing consensus that the Section 215 phone records program should not continue in its current form. The bulk collection of Americans phone records has not made us safer. I look forward to working with the administration as it develops alternatives to this program and urge consideration of the privacy implications of any mandate that these records be held in the private sector. I also welcome the transparency measures announced today, including reforms to the secrecy surrounding National Security Letters which are in line with reforms I have been pushing for years.
The American people are inching toward greater understanding and eventually, perhaps, consensus about both the sweep and the implications of these programs. When it comes to Americans privacy rights, our technological prowess will always present dilemmas and challenges. Simply because we can do something does not always mean that it makes sense to do it. We need to clear-headedly evaluate what we gain from unleashing these technologies, as well as what we risk losing. We must always recognize that in a democracy, governments role is to serve the people, not the other way around.
In the wake of these announcements, Congress has important tasks ahead. The President has ordered some significant changes, but more are needed. Section 215 must still be amended, legislatively, to ensure it is not used for dragnet surveillance in the future, and we must fight to create an effective, institutional advocate at the FISA court. I will continue to push for meaningful legislative reforms to our surveillance laws.
http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comments-of-senator-patrick-leahy-d-vt-chairman-senate-committee-on-the-judiciary-following-the-presidents-national-security-speech
Udall, Wyden, Heinrich Statement Reacting to President's Speech on NSA, Surveillance Reform
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024347077
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)if they are truly outraged at all of this, then they shouldn't reauthorize.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)accountability.
Its like the outrage displayed by our allies who we know also spy on us ... and who rely on the data the NSA collects for parts of their own intelligence efforts ... but then act SHOCKED about all this.
Time for congress to step up.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)and the DUers on this board who took that, credulously....
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)well unless Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders are the ones commenting..."all other Democrats are suspect"
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)if EW or BS expressed approval, it would be "under the bus ... I never liked them, anyway" time!
cali
(114,904 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)that they were somehow coerced into doing so.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)A federal judge ruled Monday that the National Security Agencys gathering of data on all telephone calls made in the United States appears to violate the Constitutions protection against unreasonable searches.
The judge, Richard Leon of U.S. District Court in Washington, said that the NSA relied on almost-Orwellian technology that would have been unimaginable a generation ago, at the time of a landmark Supreme Court decision on phone records.
Leon, an appointee of President George W. Bush, ruled in favor of two Americans who challenged the NSA program and wanted their data removed from NSA records. The judge found that the two were likely to prevail under the Fourth Amendment, the Constitutions protection against unreasonable search and seizure.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)does not equal "Is" or "Does."
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)You are on the wrong side of history here.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)but not the wrong side of the law ... and that's what you were arguing.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)The "Laws" as currently exist are Unconstitutional. So, in a way, the laws are illegal to begin with.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I must have missed that.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)at least show us where in the order the judge made a definitive ruling, or ordered the NSA to stop collecting data on millions of phone calls.
Oh right.....he didn't.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)that they have collected data on? Oh, it does not exist. Illegal seizure of data.
Just because a ruling has not happened to date does NOT make an illegal act legal.
Response to PowerToThePeople (Reply #14)
RobertEarl This message was self-deleted by its author.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Just wanted to tell you you are arguing with posters, whom, it seems from their defense of spying, they'd just love to spy on you and know everything you do.
Thankfully we do have a constitution that keeps them and their fellow authoritarian lovers from getting into your business.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024235924
There's that.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)And the judge in New York that you cite is known for conservative decisions.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)bobduca
(1,763 posts)That makes much more doubleplus good sense eh?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)the American people will pay the consequences. The collection of metadata should be stopped now. I'm less worried about private entities collecting it, but they too should be prohibited from collecting that kind of data.