4 ms·

The reason that FISA warrant requests have such a high acceptance rate is because a federal prosecutor wouldn't ask for one unless they were certain it would be

by hooande 13y ago

The reason that FISA warrant requests have such a high acceptance rate is because a federal prosecutor wouldn't ask for one unless they were certain it would be approved. They don't have to file a request every time a federal agent wants a warrant. They have the option to say "You need to gather more evidence". They say a good trial lawyer won't ask a witness a question without knowing what the answer will be. FBI lawyers know the law and they know the judges, they won't just take shots in the dark when it comes to obtaining warrants. It's like asking why you have a 100% approval rate for your bank card purchases. If you know that you don't have enough money, you won't try to buy something. Keep in mind that it's difficult to become a federal prosecutor and the job attracts intelligent people. The kind of lawyer that you see advertising on the side of a bus or a local DA trying to make a name for herself will try to push the envelope to get as much as they can. But high level corporate or government lawyers rarely sign their names to anything that isn't legally rock solid. I just saw the Obama interview and he only hinted at this answer. As a Harvard trained lawyer he understands the system, but as POTUS he can't always be candid.

MichaelGG 13y ago
>But high level corporate or government lawyers rarely sign their names to anything that isn't legally rock solid. So magically, these "high level" people stop trying to overreach? Suddenly they're struck with a respect for privacy and law? That's simply not credible. Feds regularly abuse seizure laws[1], why would you possibly think they're more restrained elsewhere? I'd expect a reasonably high acceptance rate, especially if they're allowed to pick judges sympathetic to them. But a rate approaching zero should set off red flags. 1: e.g. http://www.wbur.org/2013/01/24/tewksbury-motel-foreclosure http://www.wbur.org/2013/01/24/tewksbury-motel-foreclosure
eatitraw 13y ago
Not just high acceptance rate, but 100% acceptance rate(or close to it). Why fucking bother about courts at all? Just let them obtain the information they want without any hassle: they are professional and know the law.
TheCondor 13y ago
That's the opium.... We don't know if the requests are good or bad. We have no way of reasoning about the approval rate other than looking to other courts, which suggest that it's impossibly high. We simply don't know but we wish. Alternatively, if you were the judge and presented with something, perhaps something you might think about rejecting and they say there is a pending threat and they think this guy might blow something up what would you do then? Knowing your decision likely would never be made public... At the very least they could make these decisions all go public after five years or something. The other counter argument here is that if everybody involved really takes it seriously, they are really looking out for our safety and really trying hard, shouldn't somewhat zealous agents try to overreach? Never a single case simply based upon religion or someone's nation of origin? Unless they just listen in anyways... In which case FISA is even more of a sham.
fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
>a federal prosecutor wouldn't ask for one unless they were certain it would be approved. Yes they would, over the course of a dozen years and many investigations, federal prosecutors would most certainly push the envelope of what is allowed to expand their power/capability, or if nothing else, to discover what the actual boundaries are.

by hooande 13y ago

MichaelGG 13y ago

>But high level corporate or government lawyers rarely sign their names to anything that isn't legally rock solid. So magically, these "high level" people stop trying to overreach? Suddenly they're struck with a respect for privacy and law? That's simply not credible. Feds regularly abuse seizure laws[1], why would you possibly think they're more restrained elsewhere? I'd expect a reasonably high acceptance rate, especially if they're allowed to pick judges sympathetic to them. But a rate approaching zero should set off red flags. 1: e.g. http://www.wbur.org/2013/01/24/tewksbury-motel-foreclosure http://www.wbur.org/2013/01/24/tewksbury-motel-foreclosure

eatitraw 13y ago

Not just high acceptance rate, but 100% acceptance rate(or close to it). Why fucking bother about courts at all? Just let them obtain the information they want without any hassle: they are professional and know the law.

TheCondor 13y ago

That's the opium.... We don't know if the requests are good or bad. We have no way of reasoning about the approval rate other than looking to other courts, which suggest that it's impossibly high. We simply don't know but we wish. Alternatively, if you were the judge and presented with something, perhaps something you might think about rejecting and they say there is a pending threat and they think this guy might blow something up what would you do then? Knowing your decision likely would never be made public... At the very least they could make these decisions all go public after five years or something. The other counter argument here is that if everybody involved really takes it seriously, they are really looking out for our safety and really trying hard, shouldn't somewhat zealous agents try to overreach? Never a single case simply based upon religion or someone's nation of origin? Unless they just listen in anyways... In which case FISA is even more of a sham.

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago

>a federal prosecutor wouldn't ask for one unless they were certain it would be approved. Yes they would, over the course of a dozen years and many investigations, federal prosecutors would most certainly push the envelope of what is allowed to expand their power/capability, or if nothing else, to discover what the actual boundaries are.