3 ms·
>a rejection rate of 0.03 percent I agree that this is too low and is a sign of rubber stamp-iness, but what would be the right rejection rate to make you feel
by ciarannolan 6y ago
>a rejection rate of 0.03 percent
I agree that this is too low and is a sign of rubber stamp-iness, but what would be the right rejection rate to make you feel more comfortable about the FISA process?
Agencies come to the court with what they think is a rock solid case, so it's not entirely outrageous that the court would have a very high approval rate. See other similar stats like the conviction rate by federal prosecutors (93%+), where they only drag a defendant into court with very good reason.
- DataWorker 6y agoThe conviction rate is a great example. “Very good reason” like Aaron Swartz trying to share scientific literature with the public?
- albntomat0 6y agoThe word choice "very good reason" in the parent comment isn't in regards to anyone's view of the ethics of a particular case. A different way of phrasing the parent comment would be prosecutors only pursue cases that they think are winnable, given the evidence available.
- ciarannolan 6y ago>The word choice "very good reason" in the parent comment isn't in regards to anyone's view of the ethics of a particular case. Thanks. I almost don't even bother commenting anymore because people come out of the woodwork with some lame gotcha like "but what about this one thing???"
- rurp 6y ago> Agencies come to the court with what they think is a rock solid case I think the rubber stamp reputation of the FISA courts undermines this assumption. Are 99.7% of cases ~really~ ironclad? Building a rock solid case takes a lot of work and if the FISA courts aren't actually going to scrutinize the evidence, I expect that the people bringing these cases will take advantage of that.
- 1cvmask 6y agoIt is not 99.7 percent. It is in fact 99.97 percent. 12 denials from 33942 requests. 1 out of roughly 2828 requests instead of 282 requests.
- modoc 6y agoHaving worked with people who bring cases to FISA, they spend a ton of time ensuring they are ironclad before they bother bringing them to FISA. Previously I had assumed it was a lot of rubber-stamping, however the folks I worked with frequently bemoaned about how incredibly difficult and time consuming it was to get a FISA warrant.
- reactor4 6y agoRead the Horowitz report. They fed you lies.
- ciarannolan 6y agoI will assume good faith in your comment. I don't think you were "fed lies" or that there's some soros deep state conspiracy going on. That being said, the approval rate for the court is pretty shocking. If this isn't a rubber stamp court, I don't know what is. Their approval rate on 41,000+ warrants in 40+ years is 99.97%. I don't think the notion that each of those 41,000+ warrants were air tight, or wouldn't be rejected by other normal (read: public, transparent, democratic) courts, passes the smell test. I would be curious to know what the approval rate for regular search/arrest warrants is too.
- ciarannolan 6y ago>Are 99.7% of cases ~really~ ironclad? >> I agree that this is too low and is a sign of rubber stamp-iness, but what would be the right rejection rate to make you feel more comfortable about the FISA process?
- pas 6y agoProbably a secondary random evaluation, and removal of unethical/lazy judges.
- dmckeon 6y agoDefendants in US federal courts plead guilty in about 90% of cases: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/11/only-2-of-federal-criminal-defendants-go-to-trial-and-most-who-do-are-found-guilty/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/11/only-2-of-f... Whether that is due to “very good reasons” or the possibility that prosecutors have many options of how many charges to bring and what degree of charge is debatable.