Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 16th Dec 2013 23:15 UTC

A federal judge in Washington ruled on Monday that the bulk collection of Americans' telephone records by the National Security Agency is likely to violate the US constitution, in the most significant legal setback for the agency since the first disclosures prompted by the whistleblower Edward Snowden.

Judge Richard Leon declared that the mass collection of metadata probably violates the fourth amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures, and was "almost Orwellian" in its scope. In a judgment replete with literary swipes against the NSA, he said James Madison, the architect of the US constitution, would be "aghast" at the scope of the agency’s collection of Americans' communications data.

It's just a preliminary ruling, and while the judge stated that he would most likely uphold the preliminary ruling after the merits of the case have been handled, there's probably thousands of appeals and stuff like that where this could crumble into dust.

Once a government has obtained a power, it rarely releases it. That's the nature of government - it can only grow.

Thread beginning with comment 578827
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by nagerst on Tue 17th Dec 2013 03:14 UTC in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
Member since:

But by this settlement actually affirm to the constitution. That is why people might be afraid of judges that want to change the laws. The supreme court can make this valid rulings by majority. Social issues should never be handled by any government or majority. Taxation we might dis-or agree upon. Same with what the government should do.

What Obama forgot in his swearing in process though. (he has mentioned several time his made up responsobilities) The oath he took and made public is "To uphold the constitution of these united stated of america" Obama has been pushing both SOPA and PIPA as well as CISPA and so on, thus breaking his oath.

I am sad to say, when the democrats behave this way, they are bound to lose next election if they support the previous presidents policies in any way and i am much more of a democrat than most democrats in congress. And just as Buush policies they will be revoked, these will just stay and grow the government to an even bigger mosnter.

The patent system is the same, only because a few players still wants it to be big or even bigger the government complies due to lobbying.

Sollution: Demand of your congressman to provide transcript on paper to every library in your district for every speech he does in the capitol building so that anyone can read it and thus you can keep him accountable for your vote. Shut down the patent office and let people compete in the free market.
(nothing has proven better for innovation and wealth so far)
The federal government should NOT protect protect IP at all as it is not even mentioned in the US constitution as one of it's duties. And as you know "everything not mentioned" are and shall be with the individual then the state.
Perhaps if you can not make money on crap, you should focus on something else. If your movie flops: Perhaps you did not do enough work to justify the cost or you are not talented enough or were selling it poorly.
If you did code a piece of code and it is decidedly is not worthy of joining the main branch.

Getting pyed for "Percieved effort" hurts my soul if i believed in one.

I hope i did not wall anyone.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Alfman on Tue 17th Dec 2013 04:54 in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
Alfman Member since:


"The federal government should NOT protect protect IP at all as it is not even mentioned in the US constitution as one of it's duties."

Technically speaking it is mentioned in the constitution: "The Congress shall have power ... To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;". However it's clearly being abused today, and all the modern legislation around copyrights/patents are motivated by corporations wanting to increase the abuse rather than mitigate it. Applying patents to software is just ridiculous, if only the forefathers could have known...

The forefathers had great intentions, in many ways the constitution was retaliation of the abuses they witnessed within the English system of government. So it's obvious they anticipated abuse and they developed the US government in the best way they could to curb it. Alas, they didn't have a crystal ball to tell them exactly where and how it would be abused, and in some cases overtly ignored. I also think they would be very surprised at how much power has been concentrated into corporate conglomerates with virtually unchecked influence on government policy using their armies of lawyers, lobbyists, and money. The sheer scale of today's monopolies was inconceivable then. They didn't know... at that time all the power was within governments and the church. I think it's likely they would have done more to empower ordinary citizens from sources of enormous power outside of government as well if they had conceived it.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Tue 17th Dec 2013 05:36 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:

There should be no question that money controls our government. It controls our laws. It controls our regulations. It controls foreign & domestic policy. It controls everything and politicians appear to be little more than puppets & placeholders today. They rotate in & out with little to no impact on the people behind the curtain -- the small handful of people who own & control practically everything, with their hands wrapped firmly around our civilizations throat.

In a different post you commented, "It's critical we fight for our constitutional rights tooth and nail because it's all we really have in fighting oppressive government tendencies, otherwise it just becomes a glorified piece of paper symbolizing all the rights we've lost". I would submit that the more you peel this onion, the more it looks like we've already reached that point. We're `more free` here to wander than in other places, but we are certainly only doing so within the fence-lines set by our masters/owners. There are several good books written about the illusion of freedom.

Reply Parent Score: 3