9 ms·
The Supreme Court just made a US-EU Privacy Shield agreement even harder
- hirundo 5y agoI have long opposed the EU data privacy regulations, but have to admit that this issue is an excellent result of those. It seems to actually have the potential of making the US security apparatus a bit more accountable. Hopefully it will also lead other US citizens to have a similar reaction to the their government that I do: shame.
- Sporktacular 5y agoYou're opposed to EU privacy regulations? If you feel the US government is unaccountable, why would you oppose Europeans acting on the same concern?
- throwaway15908 5y ago[flagged]
- patmorgan23 5y agoThe EU data privacy regulations seem pretty reasonable and frankly long over due.
- Melatonic 5y agoWhat do you not like about EU data privacy regulations?
- blakesterz 5y agoThis was a unanimous decision. https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/20-828.pdf https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/20-828... One place for some interesting SCOTUS stats I like: https://www.scotusblog.com/statistics/ https://www.scotusblog.com/statistics/
- tharne 5y agoI'm always surprised there isn't more coverage of this. We love to focus on how polarized the court is, but a surprising number of decisions are unanimous or near unanimous.
- vmception 5y agoAlso: everyone thinks the case they care about is a landmark case. Doesn't mean its a big deal, for you or the people you care about or at all.
- whatshisface 5y agoThe SC tries to only take landmark cases and their precedent is more important than the precedent of any other court.
- vmception 5y agowhich doesn't change anything I wrote at all not everything on their docket has the same weight of importance as the other things on their docket, nearly everyone thinks the thing on the docket that they care about is more important than the other thing just something to keep in mind when someone is trying to get you to pay attention to their cause
- dado3212 5y agoThat’s because most of the decisions are like this one: “hey, I think this law is being interpreted wrongly” and then the Court says “no idea how you read it like that, it says this”. As they say in the closing statement, “We reiterate that today’s decision addresses only the narrow question whether §1806(f ) displaces the state secrets privilege. Because we conclude that §1806(f ) does not have that effect under either party’s interpretation of the statute, we do not decide which interpretation is correct. Nor do we decide whether the Government’s evidence is privileged or whether the District Court was correct to dismiss respondents’ claims on the pleadings.” This is how most of them come down, and how most of them should come down: “Congress wrote it like this, if you want to change it, get Congress to pass a new law”.
- lmkg 5y agoOf note: one of the co-authors of this article, Patrick Toomey, is a US Senator (R-Pennsylvania). The fact that someone in Congress is involved in this issue increases, however marginally, the odds that it will be addressed. [edit] It appears I was mistaken, because The Hill website was also mistaken. Same name, different guy.
- yodon 5y agoAre you sure it's the same Patrick Toomey? The article describes his bio as Senior Staff Attorney with the ACLU's National Security Project and legal Co-Counsel on the case in question. Presumably if the author were also a US Senator they would have mentioned it.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago> sure it's the same Patrick Toomey Same Toomey [1]. Just a different mantel. [1] https://thehill.com/people/patrick-toomey https://thehill.com/people/patrick-toomey
- runlevel1 5y agoThey linked to the wrong person. This is the Pat Toomey that co-wrote the article: https://www.aclu.org/news/by/patrick-toomey/ https://www.aclu.org/news/by/patrick-toomey/
- lucasmullens 5y agoYou can open his bio on the site where it shows his picture and "OCCUPATION: Senator, 2011 - Present"
- lavezza 5y agoThe Hill site is wrong. The ACLU Pat Toomey is Patrick C. Toomey. Picture of him here: https://www.justsecurity.org/author/toomeypatrick/ https://www.justsecurity.org/author/toomeypatrick/ The Senator is Patrick Joseph Toomey Jr. Maybe the Hill automates scanning the bylines and adds links to bios. Obviously it isn't perfect.
- mtgx 5y ago
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 5y agoI think the EU should be careful about overplaying its hand with respect to this agreement. Especially with the the current economic situation, the EU is likely to be more heavily dependent on the US for energy (natural gas). In addition, the largest EU country (Germany) is very heavily export dependent. If this escalates into a trade war, the EU would be on the losing side.
- tharne 5y agoThe EU is in a rough spot sovereignty-wise. They're dependent on the U.S. for security and the Russians (or possibly now also the U.S.) for energy.
- AniseAbyss 5y agoWe can fix that or bend over. If one studies the history of European countries you'll find bending over is the outlier.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 5y ago> If one studies the history of European countries you'll find bending over is the outlier. Before or after 1945? Before 1945(and especially before 1918), I agree. After 1945, the experiences of losing a generation in the crucibles of WWI and WWII seems to have broken the European martial spirit. Europe has done a lot of bending over since 1945 (decolonization was not because of some moral enlightenment, but mainly because they did not have the resources to continue with it). See Soviet domination of Eastern Europe. See Suez Canal. See Bosnia where Europe could not intervene to stop a genocide in its own backyard.
- antientropic 5y agoLooking at the current war in Ukraine, the "martial spirit" seems to be alive and well in Europe.
- syshum 5y ago