5 ms·

Okay, what seems to be going on is: a) DHS / Customs & Border Protection want to unmask the person(s) behind the @ALT_USCIS account b) They want to use an unn

Okay, what seems to be going on is: a) DHS / Customs & Border Protection want to unmask the person(s) behind the @ALT_USCIS account b) They want to use an unnamed "investigatory tool" to do this c) Twitter does not want them to do this, on (extensive) 1st amendment grounds d) Twitter says the Supreme Court is on their side on this issue The lawsuit is to stop DHS / CBP from using the tool. The "tool" is a legal "tool" - an ability granted to the agencies to legally compel Twitter to do stuff. The reasonable editorial is then that the Government wants to do this because they don't like being criticized or contradicted by these ALT_* accounts, and Twitter wants the accounts to stay anonymous because the criticism is good (both in terms of quality and effect), and taking away that anonymity is all kinds of bad. (I'm totally on Twitter's side on this)

Jach 10y ago
On c), not just 1st amendment grounds. That's their secondary complaint. Their primary complaint is that the summons invoked a nonsensical justification, related to merchandise imports, for its lawful authority to make such a summons. This one: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1509 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1509
oligopoly 10y ago
And the reason for the unmasking request from the article: >@ALT_uscis is one of a string of accounts claiming to be operated by rogue government employees, formed in the wake of Donald Trump’s inauguration. It’s unclear whether any of the accounts are authentic — including @ALT_uscis — although many purport to offer an insider perspective. The Trump administration has responded aggressively to leaks in the past, including on-the-spot phone checks of White House staffers suspected of sharing information with the press. Imagine George W. Bush has his stooges trying to undermine and overthrow Obama if you don't see why this would be problematic for current administration.
- navbaker 10y ago
  Is "overthrow" your hyperbolic way of saying "using free speech to dissent"?
  - oligopoly 10y ago
    Sharing secret information is now free speech? Obama surveilled political opponents in the tune which makes his actions 100 x times worse than Watergate scandal. I guess that's free speech to dissent as well. -3 huh? You've been reading Fake News if you aren't aware of Obama's spying on Trump.
    - myko 10y ago
      You are going to want to back that statement up with some facts.
    - dplgk 10y ago
      Please state a source for your claim
      - gabeh 10y ago
        https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837989835818287106 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/83798983581828710...
        eduren 10y ago
        Ah, its refreshing to finally see some real news on HN.
        oligopoly 10y ago
        Funny how you are being downvoted for providing source. Susan Rice in the middle of this as Bloomberg reported: http://archive.is/bewC6 http://archive.is/bewC6 NYTIMES: Wiretapped data used in inquiry OF TRUMP aides: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2017/03/06/C6QFVLwUsAEz7cI_0.jpg http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/im... Edit: Asked for source and get downvoted for providing one. What a surprise when truth doesn't align with your political leanings.
- contravariant 10y ago
  If someone is deliberately trying to undermine the government with twitter accounts then they would have a valid case. If there is even probable cause that this is happening then that would be enough for a warrant. The fact that they resort to a custom's law suggests that they can't show either of these to be true.
- fictioncircle 10y ago
  > Imagine George W. Bush has his stooges trying to undermine and overthrow Obama if you don't see why this would be problematic for current administration. I'm uncertain why you think government employees exercising their 1st amendment rights is a problem?
TorKlingberg 10y ago
The Verge has a reasonable summary: http://www.theverge.com/2017/4/6/15211092/twitter-trump-lawsuit-customs-alt-government http://www.theverge.com/2017/4/6/15211092/twitter-trump-laws...
riffic 10y ago
I will host any "alt" accounts on my mastodon instance and give a "YUGE" middle finger to any DHS requests to unmask them. Let's not let freedom die on our watch.
- Jimmie_Rustle 10y ago
  so edgy man
JumpCrisscross 10y ago
> an unnamed "investigatory tool" to do this Paragraph 7 of the complaint identifies 19 U.S.C. § 1509 as "the sole statutory authority CBP invoked in issuing the summons" [1]. It appears to be a customs authority related to the "examination of books and witnesses" [2]. Sufficient to say, it's a stupid overreach. Side note: we need a fund that re-imburses private companies for challenging such orders. It could be managed by the ACLU, EFF, et cetera. What Twitter is doing, here, is public service. [1] https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3538047-Twitter-Complaint.html https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3538047-Twitter-Comp... [2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1509 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1509
- RangerScience 10y ago
  > Side note: we need a fund that re-imburses private companies for challenging such orders. Oh that's good. Hmm. People have wondered how to make a programmer's union different from existing unions. I wonder if doing dual duty - also running this - would help that, or simply make more kinds of things vulnerable to the failure modes of unions...? Edit: Basically, an organization to protect programmer's ability to positively impact the world...? Rather than one protecting just the people, or protecting the corporations, since due to startup culture that line is pretty blurry?
  - shshhdhs 10y ago
    This is a fascinating topic. But it would be important to keep it apolitical in nature. Perhaps defending / following the EU's human rights?
  - nojvek 10y ago
    This definitely makes sense. Governments and corporations sometimes walk all over customers in the name of collecting more data. A well funded Corp could keep them on their toes.
guelo 10y ago
From the doc: "the particular investigatory tool employed here — which Congress authorized solely to ensure compliance with federal laws concerning imported merchandise"

Jach 10y ago

On c), not just 1st amendment grounds. That's their secondary complaint. Their primary complaint is that the summons invoked a nonsensical justification, related to merchandise imports, for its lawful authority to make such a summons. This one: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1509 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1509

oligopoly 10y ago

And the reason for the unmasking request from the article: >@ALT_uscis is one of a string of accounts claiming to be operated by rogue government employees, formed in the wake of Donald Trump’s inauguration. It’s unclear whether any of the accounts are authentic — including @ALT_uscis — although many purport to offer an insider perspective. The Trump administration has responded aggressively to leaks in the past, including on-the-spot phone checks of White House staffers suspected of sharing information with the press. Imagine George W. Bush has his stooges trying to undermine and overthrow Obama if you don't see why this would be problematic for current administration.

navbaker 10y ago
Is "overthrow" your hyperbolic way of saying "using free speech to dissent"?
- oligopoly 10y ago
  Sharing secret information is now free speech? Obama surveilled political opponents in the tune which makes his actions 100 x times worse than Watergate scandal. I guess that's free speech to dissent as well. -3 huh? You've been reading Fake News if you aren't aware of Obama's spying on Trump.
  - myko 10y ago
    You are going to want to back that statement up with some facts.
  - dplgk 10y ago
    Please state a source for your claim
    - gabeh 10y ago
      https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837989835818287106 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/83798983581828710...
      - eduren 10y ago
        Ah, its refreshing to finally see some real news on HN.
      - oligopoly 10y ago
        Funny how you are being downvoted for providing source. Susan Rice in the middle of this as Bloomberg reported: http://archive.is/bewC6 http://archive.is/bewC6 NYTIMES: Wiretapped data used in inquiry OF TRUMP aides: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2017/03/06/C6QFVLwUsAEz7cI_0.jpg http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/im... Edit: Asked for source and get downvoted for providing one. What a surprise when truth doesn't align with your political leanings.
contravariant 10y ago
If someone is deliberately trying to undermine the government with twitter accounts then they would have a valid case. If there is even probable cause that this is happening then that would be enough for a warrant. The fact that they resort to a custom's law suggests that they can't show either of these to be true.
fictioncircle 10y ago
> Imagine George W. Bush has his stooges trying to undermine and overthrow Obama if you don't see why this would be problematic for current administration. I'm uncertain why you think government employees exercising their 1st amendment rights is a problem?

TorKlingberg 10y ago

The Verge has a reasonable summary: http://www.theverge.com/2017/4/6/15211092/twitter-trump-lawsuit-customs-alt-government http://www.theverge.com/2017/4/6/15211092/twitter-trump-laws...

riffic 10y ago

I will host any "alt" accounts on my mastodon instance and give a "YUGE" middle finger to any DHS requests to unmask them. Let's not let freedom die on our watch.

Jimmie_Rustle 10y ago
so edgy man

JumpCrisscross 10y ago

> an unnamed "investigatory tool" to do this Paragraph 7 of the complaint identifies 19 U.S.C. § 1509 as "the sole statutory authority CBP invoked in issuing the summons" [1]. It appears to be a customs authority related to the "examination of books and witnesses" [2]. Sufficient to say, it's a stupid overreach. Side note: we need a fund that re-imburses private companies for challenging such orders. It could be managed by the ACLU, EFF, et cetera. What Twitter is doing, here, is public service. [1] https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3538047-Twitter-Complaint.html https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3538047-Twitter-Comp... [2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1509 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1509

RangerScience 10y ago
> Side note: we need a fund that re-imburses private companies for challenging such orders. Oh that's good. Hmm. People have wondered how to make a programmer's union different from existing unions. I wonder if doing dual duty - also running this - would help that, or simply make more kinds of things vulnerable to the failure modes of unions...? Edit: Basically, an organization to protect programmer's ability to positively impact the world...? Rather than one protecting just the people, or protecting the corporations, since due to startup culture that line is pretty blurry?
- shshhdhs 10y ago
  This is a fascinating topic. But it would be important to keep it apolitical in nature. Perhaps defending / following the EU's human rights?
- nojvek 10y ago
  This definitely makes sense. Governments and corporations sometimes walk all over customers in the name of collecting more data. A well funded Corp could keep them on their toes.

guelo 10y ago

From the doc: "the particular investigatory tool employed here — which Congress authorized solely to ensure compliance with federal laws concerning imported merchandise"