4 ms·

The UK lacks a formal Constitution with something like the 1st Amendment. Instead it has something called the Human Rights Act which includes all kinds of exce

The UK lacks a formal Constitution with something like the 1st Amendment. Instead it has something called the Human Rights Act which includes all kinds of exceptions to free speech. The US 1st Amendment is not absolute but it's the closest thing we have to an absolute right here. The infringement of free speech is possibly the single most controversial aspect of US National Security Letters. It's generally very difficult to limit a person's free speech because of the 1st Amendment. While in UK it seems like they can easily add exceptions like not being able to discuss a court order.

wfo 11y ago
The FBI use NSLs fairly freely and nobody really seems to object. The first amendment doesn't really seem to help us here. I think the only reason this wasn't done under a gag order is the FBI wants to use public response to win this case since it's about a terrorist attack (IIRC, they tried the exact same request about a Meth dealer and it was refused) so they can set a precedent. You can't set a precedent for open court and rally the public behind you if it's all secret.
- mmmBacon 11y ago
  Most gag orders can be challenged and have to serve a benefit of some kind and be of limited duration (like to guarantee a fair trail). A NSL gag order can be challenged. In December 2008, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that some of the NSL gag provisions were unconstitutional, in part because they limited judicial review of the gag orders and forced courts to defer to the government’s assertions about the necessity of a gag order and also thwarted the ability of recipients to challenge a gag order. [source:] http://www.wired.com/2010/08/nsl-gag-order-lifted/ http://www.wired.com/2010/08/nsl-gag-order-lifted/ And more gag provisions were overturned in 2013. https://www.crowelldatalaw.com/2013/04/gagging-the-fbi-the-unconstitutionality-of-national-security-letters/ https://www.crowelldatalaw.com/2013/04/gagging-the-fbi-the-u... I think the overturning of these provisions of the NSL gag order she the power of the 1st Amendment a show the US judiciary tend to be skeptical whenever the government attempts to limit free speech.

wfo 11y ago

The FBI use NSLs fairly freely and nobody really seems to object. The first amendment doesn't really seem to help us here. I think the only reason this wasn't done under a gag order is the FBI wants to use public response to win this case since it's about a terrorist attack (IIRC, they tried the exact same request about a Meth dealer and it was refused) so they can set a precedent. You can't set a precedent for open court and rally the public behind you if it's all secret.

mmmBacon 11y ago
Most gag orders can be challenged and have to serve a benefit of some kind and be of limited duration (like to guarantee a fair trail). A NSL gag order can be challenged. In December 2008, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that some of the NSL gag provisions were unconstitutional, in part because they limited judicial review of the gag orders and forced courts to defer to the government’s assertions about the necessity of a gag order and also thwarted the ability of recipients to challenge a gag order. [source:] http://www.wired.com/2010/08/nsl-gag-order-lifted/ http://www.wired.com/2010/08/nsl-gag-order-lifted/ And more gag provisions were overturned in 2013. https://www.crowelldatalaw.com/2013/04/gagging-the-fbi-the-unconstitutionality-of-national-security-letters/ https://www.crowelldatalaw.com/2013/04/gagging-the-fbi-the-u... I think the overturning of these provisions of the NSL gag order she the power of the 1st Amendment a show the US judiciary tend to be skeptical whenever the government attempts to limit free speech.