6 ms·

Has any court ruled NSA actions to be against the Constitution?

by ikeboy 11y ago

HiYaBarbie 11y ago
How does it matter?
- ikeboy 11y ago
  If years after the Snowden revelation, no one has gotten a court to rule that blatant widespread constitutional violations took place at the NSA, you might want to reconsider your claim that there were blatant violations.
  - HiYaBarbie 11y ago
    You're disingenuous so I'll just not bother anymore.
    - flyryan 11y ago
      You're stating that the organization "as a whole" is "blatantly" violating the Constitution. Don't you see why your statement is being challenged? It's largely baseless. At most, a small number of programs that the NSA has used have been shown to maybe be unconstitutional.
    - dang 11y ago
      > You're disingenuous so I'll just not bother anymore. We've banned this account for repeatedly violating the HN guidelines.
      - HiYaBarbie 11y ago
        That is complete horseshit and you know it. I just made a statement and a decision. He's free to disagree with my assessment, and I'm free to not give a fuck. We're both free to move on with our lives. But then you decide to ride in on your High Horse to save the day! Earlier you reprimanded me for saying "shut up", which is just fucking retarded to begin with, and you're engaging in a double standard because his posts were clearly not "substantive" (and thus against the arbitrarily enforced rules). Just so you know, whenever you ban someone for calling things as they are, and trying to get people think for themselves, you're essentially supporting your own enslavement. You're probably a psychopath yourself, of course, but most likely not protected from the potentially perpetual tyranny the world will slide into if sanity doesn't spread widely enough.
ionised 11y ago
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/07/us-usa-security-nsa-idUSKBN0NS1IN20150507 http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/07/us-usa-security-ns... http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/federal-judge-rules-against-nsa http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/federal-judge-rules-against-n... http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/16/justice/nsa-surveillance-court-ruling/ http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/16/justice/nsa-surveillance-c...
- ikeboy 11y ago
  The first one doesn't say anything about constitutional issues. The appeals court did not rule on whether the surveillance violated the U.S. Constitution. The second link has a ton of links. The first one is only referring to a preliminary injunction; i.e., it found that "there's a good chance the plaintiff will win", but did not find in favor of the plaintiff. As far as I can tell, all the other links there are about the same ruling. The third link is talking about that same ruling, again: A federal judge said Monday that he believes the government's once-secret collection of domestic phone records is unconstitutional Emphasis on believes; that was not a judicial finding that the government violated the constitution. He didn't even order the government to stop: However, he put off enforcing his order barring the government from collecting the information, pending an appeal by the government. What happened on appeal? http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/ED64DC482F286F1785257EAF004F71E8/$file/14-5004-1570210.pdf http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/ED64DC482..., or a more readable summary here http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-28/u-s-appeals-court-sends-nsa-collection-challenge-back-to-judge http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-28/u-s-appeal... and http://www.ibtimes.com/nsa-phone-surveillance-ruling-reversed-court-sides-national-security-agency-klayman-v-2073190 http://www.ibtimes.com/nsa-phone-surveillance-ruling-reverse...

Has any court ruled NSA actions to be against the Constitution?

by ikeboy 11y ago

Has any court ruled NSA actions to be against the Constitution?

HiYaBarbie 11y ago

How does it matter?

ikeboy 11y ago
If years after the Snowden revelation, no one has gotten a court to rule that blatant widespread constitutional violations took place at the NSA, you might want to reconsider your claim that there were blatant violations.
- HiYaBarbie 11y ago
  You're disingenuous so I'll just not bother anymore.
  - flyryan 11y ago
    You're stating that the organization "as a whole" is "blatantly" violating the Constitution. Don't you see why your statement is being challenged? It's largely baseless. At most, a small number of programs that the NSA has used have been shown to maybe be unconstitutional.
  - dang 11y ago
    > You're disingenuous so I'll just not bother anymore. We've banned this account for repeatedly violating the HN guidelines.
    - HiYaBarbie 11y ago
      That is complete horseshit and you know it. I just made a statement and a decision. He's free to disagree with my assessment, and I'm free to not give a fuck. We're both free to move on with our lives. But then you decide to ride in on your High Horse to save the day! Earlier you reprimanded me for saying "shut up", which is just fucking retarded to begin with, and you're engaging in a double standard because his posts were clearly not "substantive" (and thus against the arbitrarily enforced rules). Just so you know, whenever you ban someone for calling things as they are, and trying to get people think for themselves, you're essentially supporting your own enslavement. You're probably a psychopath yourself, of course, but most likely not protected from the potentially perpetual tyranny the world will slide into if sanity doesn't spread widely enough.

ionised 11y ago

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/07/us-usa-security-nsa-idUSKBN0NS1IN20150507 http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/07/us-usa-security-ns... http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/federal-judge-rules-against-nsa http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/federal-judge-rules-against-n... http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/16/justice/nsa-surveillance-court-ruling/ http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/16/justice/nsa-surveillance-c...

ikeboy 11y ago
The first one doesn't say anything about constitutional issues. The appeals court did not rule on whether the surveillance violated the U.S. Constitution. The second link has a ton of links. The first one is only referring to a preliminary injunction; i.e., it found that "there's a good chance the plaintiff will win", but did not find in favor of the plaintiff. As far as I can tell, all the other links there are about the same ruling. The third link is talking about that same ruling, again: A federal judge said Monday that he believes the government's once-secret collection of domestic phone records is unconstitutional Emphasis on believes; that was not a judicial finding that the government violated the constitution. He didn't even order the government to stop: However, he put off enforcing his order barring the government from collecting the information, pending an appeal by the government. What happened on appeal? http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/ED64DC482F286F1785257EAF004F71E8/$file/14-5004-1570210.pdf http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/ED64DC482..., or a more readable summary here http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-28/u-s-appeals-court-sends-nsa-collection-challenge-back-to-judge http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-28/u-s-appeal... and http://www.ibtimes.com/nsa-phone-surveillance-ruling-reversed-court-sides-national-security-agency-klayman-v-2073190 http://www.ibtimes.com/nsa-phone-surveillance-ruling-reverse...