4 ms·
Yeah, looking over this again, it appears you're correct and the CISPAesqueness could be disputed. The very short time limits (some of these actually apply to t
by jen_h 13y ago
Yeah, looking over this again, it appears you're correct and the CISPAesqueness could be disputed. The very short time limits (some of these actually apply to the officers serving the warrant) and the contempt of court threat are worrisome, though. The Senate bill also isn't quite clear as to whether they'd ask for data outside of what's legally allowable via ECPA or other US Federal/International privacy laws.
Note that the House version of the bill (http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/html/HB01608I.htm http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/html/HB0...) appears to be a net boon for user privacy - it requires a warrant for location tracking and requires agencies to compile a yearly report of warrants and orders.
- eurleif 13y ago>The very short time limits IANAL, and I may not be reading the bill correctly, but it looks to me like the limit is always 10 days, which doesn't seem that bad to me. The relevant language is: "10 whole days if the warrant is issued under Section 5A, Article 18.21". Section 5A is the meat of this bill. I think the warrants we're concerned with are all issued under section 5A. Note that the 3 day limit is current law. The 10 day limit is new. >the contempt of court threat What would the penalty be for failing to comply with a court-issued search warrant, if not contempt of court? I was under the impression that was already normal.