If You Can't Sue The Feds For Spying, Sue Them For Lying About Spying
from the again-and-again dept
There have been numerous attempts by various parties (including, in a few cases, the EFF) to sue the US government concerning various aspects of its warrantless spying on Americans. Pretty much all of these cases end up failing, often for reasons that are suspect. However, it appears that the EFF is going to try again. As you may recall, back in July, the feds admitted to Senator Wyden that their own analysis discovered that they had violated the 4th Amendment on occasion in carrying out surveillance under the FISA Amendments Act.
In response to this, the EFF filed Freedom of Information Act requests, asking for documents concerning the situation in which such searches were deemed unreasonable under the 4th Amendment. The feds more or less ignored the FOIA request. So the EFF is suing for violations under the FOIA. It may not be as sexy as suing about the actual spying, but that path has already been shut down plenty of times. I’d guess that this approach won’t succeed either (though I hope it does!). But, at the very least, hopefully it can call some attention to the massive secrecy by the feds as Congress gets ready to re-approve the FISA Amendments Act without bothering to understand how it’s being used.
Filed Under: 4th amendment, foia, lawsuits, privacy
Companies: eff
Comments on “If You Can't Sue The Feds For Spying, Sue Them For Lying About Spying”
I think they just don’t get it… that ship has already sailed. They can keep tilting at windmills, but they are pretty much dead on the issue.
Not sure why Google would want to finance this sort of thing.
Re: Re:
It must have something to do with the Kenyan Communazi conspiracy!
Re: Re:
“…that ship has already sailed. They can keep tilting at windmills, but they are pretty much dead on the issue.”
Are you trying to beat some sort of idiom density record?
Re: Re: Re:
Haha I was thinking that exact same thing.
Re: Re: Re:
-m+t more like. Let you guess where in the sentence 😀
Re: Re:
“It’s all Google’s fault”
Re: Re:
I think they just don’t get it… that ship has already sailed. They can keep tilting at windmills, but they are pretty much dead on the issue.
OK I’ll take what you said at face value. Then I have to ask:
What kind of person is it that gloats over someone else have got away with wrongdoing?
Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, it’s like gloating about a pedophile getting away with raping kids. Why on earth would you be happy about that?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I didn’t know Pedobear was responsible for Federal spying.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Hey, given the competence lkevels of both in this area, it wouldn’t surprise me at all.
Re: Re: Re:
What kind of person is it that gloats over someone else have got away with wrongdoing?
I’d say only a real, fucking asshole…. like all of those people crying over the capture of the Svartholm. Here’s an example of a particular sort of douchebag you seem to be referring to:
“PaulT (profile), Sep 6th, 2012 @ 2:35am
Ah yes, the AC mantra – lies, deceit, collusion, bribery and lawbreaking are OK as long as it’s US who benefit from it! It’s OK to destroy freedoms in other countries because someone might have copied some files for profit!
“Why should he get to hide out in a third world country and avoid paying for his crimes?”
Because, despite your best attempts so far, other countries are not bound to your laws. Unless, of course, that you’re going to claim that the US should deport all political refugees currently claiming asylum in your country to avoid persecution under the laws of their home countries? Not saying so would make you a hypocrite, but I expect that.
So I agree with you, realizing that your fellow Techdirtbags largely fit the bill.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I have to admit you’re the Riddik of trolling. Keep on fighting the Techdirt windmills Don Q.!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wow, I bet when you said that in your head, it sounded waaay more mature and insightful.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Actually he got hurt with the amount of truth in the comment and tried to vent out here by mocking the whole community. Obviously he failed.
Re: Re:
Not sure why Google would want to finance this sort of thing.
I don’t know, Google has financed the creation of all known universe after all. There must be some ominous reasoning behind all that money thrown on useless projects.
Meanwhile, Google is at fault for hunger in Africa, they should do something about that.
A prediction
Judge: National security is WAY more important than that whole “democracy” thing.
If you can’t get them for spying, get them for lying?
Sounds like the Al Capone method of prosecution (or rather the Frank J Wilson method I guess)
Re: Re:
Actually the Al-Capone method would be to get them for fiddling their expenses – which sort of worked in the UK for a bit..
Re: Re: Re:
hmm… now that’s interesting. I wonder if there is a way to take the NSA to task via the GAO for misappropriating budget funds to spy on citizens?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Not really, because there’s No Such Agency.
/s
How to fix it
Continuing to willfully violate the constitution should carry the death penalty for treason for any government personally and department.
Anyone in the government who knows another government official is violating the constitution should have to report said offense, otherwise also risk punishment by death.
Anyone who has reported said offense to a superior is no longer in danger of the death penalty, but the burden is now on the shoulders of said superior.
This would fix problems fast.
Insanity...
Does anyone else not see the utter insanity of attempting to sue to government by way of the government monopoly known as the “Justice System”?
Until the use of State force/coercion is removed (i.e. “taxation”/theft) to allow a voluntary market of competing arbitration systems to thrive, the people calling themselves “government” that claim the “legal” use of force/coercion will continue to expand their power and destroy individual freedoms.
It’s time to wake up. Show the world that you own your self. Do not associate with individuals that advocate the use of force against you.
Re: Insanity...
Classic question: who judges the judges?
Re: Re: Insanity...
Sir Samuel Vimes, Duke of Ankh-Morpork, Captain of the City Watch, and general Angry Man.
Re: Re: Re: Insanity...
I say Mike should be declared King of Pirates an rule over the seven digital seas with his steel harpoon of poetic justice. And the trolls shall despair!
Re: Insanity...
Says a man who keeps paying them to try and throw us peaceful potheads in prison. Why do you keep associating with them through your continued tax payments?
You bunch of whiney babies...
Why are all of you crying over some Gov’t snooping? Do you have something to hide?!?!? If not, then no one should mind having their privacy dissolved in the federal acid that is known as the NSA.
…and why does no one ever talk about the fact that the NSA is a military organization? So not only do they violate the constitution by spying on Americans illegally, no form of U.S. military is supposed to EVER be used as a police force against its own countries citizens… But hey, who cares about the semantics of the NSA’s anticonstitution movement…
Re: You bunch of whiney babies...
State of national emergency, NDAA.
President can do whatever he wants, military can do whatever they want.
Don’t expect change anytime soon, either. I wouldn’t bet on Romney giving up the dictator’s power, and Obama’s already signed off on both of the above (after throwing a hissy fit until Congress amended the NDAA so it wouldn’t undermine his authority).
At least someone is looking out for us
Well before I read this article I didn’t know such an organization existed. I’m glad that at least someone is looking out for our privacy.
Admitted? Read that again.
Here’s the quote:
It says only that:
? The government did something that a court believes violated the law.
? The government violated the spirit of the law, in the opinion of the Director.
(In other words, it’s hardly admitting anything. This is not an accident.)
Re: Admitted? Read that again.
Here, let me give you the Techdirt answer:
If they aren’t breaking the law, they aren’t trying to push the boundaries of what is possible.
It works for pirate sites and enablers, so why shouldn’t it work for the feds too?