5 ms·

Court Opinion Finding NSA Surveillance Unconstitutional to be released

171 points by peterkelly 13y ago

albeertoni 13y ago
A small step toward some sort of transparency, I hope!
jlgreco 13y ago
"President Obama has repeatedly said he welcomes a debate on the NSA’s surveillance" "For almost two years, EFF has been fighting the government in federal court to force the public release of an 86-page opinion of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)." Ugh. Just ugh.
- Vivtek 13y ago
  "I welcome a debate - just not right now. Ideally, I welcome it after I'm out of office, because believe you me, it's going to be torches-and-pitchforks time when this shit hits the fan. But in the meantime, it sounds a lot better if I welcome that debate."
  - Vivtek 13y ago
    Come to think of it - I just now realized why Hillary Clinton is not planning on running this year. Interesting. I'm guessing they're going to hand off this particular political grenade back to the Republicans, just like the Republicans stayed away from the election in droves last year.
    - outside1234 13y ago
      the only reason she is not running this year (in reality she is already running) is that there isn't a presidential election until 2016.
    - anigbrowl 13y ago
      Running for what? We don't even have mid-term elections until next year, and those are only for Congress.
      - Vivtek 13y ago
        Ugh. "Campaigning this year for the 2016 presidential elections" - why does everybody in this community so very love to pick nits?
  - spoiledtechie 13y ago
    What are you talking about torches and pitchforks? I wish we as a community stood up against this and bring torches, but rather we stay behind a computer and sit quietly.... No torches and pitchforks even if we wanted to...
    - libraryatnight 13y ago
      I'd love to see something organized, some sort of showing, it seems like rallies or protests should be easier to organize these days.
  - jgeorge 13y ago
    I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking the unspoken end of the sentence "I welcome a debate..." was "...anytime after February 2016."
  - erichurkman 13y ago
    He won't have time to debate anything after leaving office; he'll be too busy doing rallies and fundraisers for the DNC and collecting 6-figure speaking fees. (Based on recent past presidents, anyway.)
devx 13y ago
With 90 percent of it redacted? Hopefully it won't be. Also, if we finally have proof for such extensive unconstitutionality - can we start impeaching members of the government already, starting from the high-est level and down? Oh, and donate to support EFF in more such future efforts: https://supporters.eff.org/donate https://supporters.eff.org/donate
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- betterunix 13y ago
  Why wait? James Clapper lied to Congress -- that's perjury, obstruction of Congress, and making false statements. We should also be talking about an investigation into the Obama administration, to determine if Clapper was acting alone or if he was part of a larger conspiracy.
pvnick 13y ago
Awesome! I've been looking forward to this for a long time. I don't have much to add to the discussion other than to express my cautious joy that this is coming to light (I'm nervous at the extent to which the opinion will be redacted). Btw, is anybody else recently becoming optimistic that we could actually see some real reform? I see an administration and agency caught off-guard, completely in the dark as to the full extent of the coming revelations, and a bureaucracy comfortable operating in secret exposed into the light. I see the tide truly shifting, both in public opinion as well as in congress. I think some very powerful people are now very rightfully scared.
- revscat 13y ago
  | Btw, is anybody else recently becoming optimistic that we could actually see some real reform? Not really, no. The factions which benefit from this have not been hurt much, if at all, by their exposure. Nor has there been any call for a change in policy from those in a position to do so. There has been increased protestations from the political edges, but the core remains solidly in favor of privacy invasions and absolute government power No Congressional hearings, few editorial calls for change, and a President who continually lies about it and has expressed no outrage whatsoever. The oligarchy remains as powerful as ever. If anything, more so, because now that the people are aware if it they will begin to adjust to this new reality.
- bratsche 13y ago
  I find myself usually disappointed by the vast majority of what Congress and the White House say and do, so I'm still finding it difficult to be optimistic. I was, however, pleasantly surprised by how close the vote to defund the NSA's operations came. I think that may have been the point where this issue because more serious.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    As somebody on HN pointed out before, so long as they know something will pass or fail regardless, whips will give more leeway to party members so they can vote however makes them look good. If there were real danger of a vote going the wrong way, they would tighten up their ship. A close vote seems good, but in reality it isn't necessarily as close as it looked.
betterunix 13y ago
Oh, is Obama finally beginning to understand that when he promised to create the most transparent administration in US history, people actually expected him to do so?
- Joeri 13y ago
  In Obama's defense, you've never been as informed about all the sneaky stuff the government is up to as right now.
  - LoganCale 13y ago
    Which has nothing to do with Obama and he would stop it if he could.
- j2d3 13y ago
  There is just a huge divide between what any politician will say to get elected and what he believes he is compelled to actually do once elected. I don't think he's "beginning to understand" anything. I think he fully understands the crazy ass chess game he's been playing all along. Actually creating the most transparent administration in US history is - well - an extremely subjective and pretty much immeasurable / untestable sort of claim to make in the first place. TONS of wiggle room. Also it's his last term, he doesn't have to do shit except finish out and collect public speaking fees and board compensation checks for - forever.
- samstave 13y ago
  Hah - you foolishly misunderstood the definition of the term "transparent"!! What he meant was that everything was transparent TO the administration. All the world an open book to the administration and its agents. Not only that, it even set it up in the classic American way, so contractors such as Booz Allen could profit from it!! You lowly pleb!
rosser 13y ago
I'm tempted to start taking odds on the redacted:non-redacted ratio in the released document.
- xntrk 13y ago
  95% redacted is my bet
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    55% redacted is my bet. There are a lot of filler words in most documents. You can destroy a lot of meaning with only a few redactions.
- x0054 13y ago
  My guess is 20% reducted. But you have to remember, you can change the meaning of a sentence by removing just one word, or even a comma. The problem is, we will never know if we get the true meaning of the document. As an aside, if there ever will be the next Edward Snowden, I think he or she should collect all the phone records, email records, and other data for every person in congress. Release that data, and we will quickly see some change.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    Leak internal communications generated in response to the previous leak. Repeat recursively until you find the attractor.
rcavezza 13y ago
I just want to make sure I have this correct. 1.) Two years ago, a secret court ruled that this NSA surveillance is unconstitutional. 2.) The NSA made this decision secret and never released the ruling. 3.) The NSA continued its surveillance program that was ruled illegal by a court. Is this really what happened?
- adestefan 13y ago
  Or they changed the program to actually make it Constitutional.
UVB-76 13y ago
Here's the document: https://www.eff.org/document/october-3-2011-fisc-opinion-holding-nsa-surveillance-unconstitutional https://www.eff.org/document/october-3-2011-fisc-opinion-hol...

171 points by peterkelly 13y ago

A small step toward some sort of transparency, I hope!

"President Obama has repeatedly said he welcomes a debate on the NSA’s surveillance" "For almost two years, EFF has been fighting the government in federal court to force the public release of an 86-page opinion of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)." Ugh. Just ugh.

Vivtek 13y ago
"I welcome a debate - just not right now. Ideally, I welcome it after I'm out of office, because believe you me, it's going to be torches-and-pitchforks time when this shit hits the fan. But in the meantime, it sounds a lot better if I welcome that debate."
- Vivtek 13y ago
  Come to think of it - I just now realized why Hillary Clinton is not planning on running this year. Interesting. I'm guessing they're going to hand off this particular political grenade back to the Republicans, just like the Republicans stayed away from the election in droves last year.
  - outside1234 13y ago
    the only reason she is not running this year (in reality she is already running) is that there isn't a presidential election until 2016.
  - anigbrowl 13y ago
    Running for what? We don't even have mid-term elections until next year, and those are only for Congress.
    - Vivtek 13y ago
      Ugh. "Campaigning this year for the 2016 presidential elections" - why does everybody in this community so very love to pick nits?
- spoiledtechie 13y ago
  What are you talking about torches and pitchforks? I wish we as a community stood up against this and bring torches, but rather we stay behind a computer and sit quietly.... No torches and pitchforks even if we wanted to...
  - libraryatnight 13y ago
    I'd love to see something organized, some sort of showing, it seems like rallies or protests should be easier to organize these days.
- jgeorge 13y ago
  I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking the unspoken end of the sentence "I welcome a debate..." was "...anytime after February 2016."
- erichurkman 13y ago
  He won't have time to debate anything after leaving office; he'll be too busy doing rallies and fundraisers for the DNC and collecting 6-figure speaking fees. (Based on recent past presidents, anyway.)

devx 13y ago

With 90 percent of it redacted? Hopefully it won't be. Also, if we finally have proof for such extensive unconstitutionality - can we start impeaching members of the government already, starting from the high-est level and down? Oh, and donate to support EFF in more such future efforts: https://supporters.eff.org/donate https://supporters.eff.org/donate

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
betterunix 13y ago
Why wait? James Clapper lied to Congress -- that's perjury, obstruction of Congress, and making false statements. We should also be talking about an investigation into the Obama administration, to determine if Clapper was acting alone or if he was part of a larger conspiracy.

pvnick 13y ago

Awesome! I've been looking forward to this for a long time. I don't have much to add to the discussion other than to express my cautious joy that this is coming to light (I'm nervous at the extent to which the opinion will be redacted). Btw, is anybody else recently becoming optimistic that we could actually see some real reform? I see an administration and agency caught off-guard, completely in the dark as to the full extent of the coming revelations, and a bureaucracy comfortable operating in secret exposed into the light. I see the tide truly shifting, both in public opinion as well as in congress. I think some very powerful people are now very rightfully scared.

revscat 13y ago
| Btw, is anybody else recently becoming optimistic that we could actually see some real reform? Not really, no. The factions which benefit from this have not been hurt much, if at all, by their exposure. Nor has there been any call for a change in policy from those in a position to do so. There has been increased protestations from the political edges, but the core remains solidly in favor of privacy invasions and absolute government power No Congressional hearings, few editorial calls for change, and a President who continually lies about it and has expressed no outrage whatsoever. The oligarchy remains as powerful as ever. If anything, more so, because now that the people are aware if it they will begin to adjust to this new reality.
bratsche 13y ago
I find myself usually disappointed by the vast majority of what Congress and the White House say and do, so I'm still finding it difficult to be optimistic. I was, however, pleasantly surprised by how close the vote to defund the NSA's operations came. I think that may have been the point where this issue because more serious.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  As somebody on HN pointed out before, so long as they know something will pass or fail regardless, whips will give more leeway to party members so they can vote however makes them look good. If there were real danger of a vote going the wrong way, they would tighten up their ship. A close vote seems good, but in reality it isn't necessarily as close as it looked.

betterunix 13y ago

Oh, is Obama finally beginning to understand that when he promised to create the most transparent administration in US history, people actually expected him to do so?

Joeri 13y ago
In Obama's defense, you've never been as informed about all the sneaky stuff the government is up to as right now.
- LoganCale 13y ago
  Which has nothing to do with Obama and he would stop it if he could.
j2d3 13y ago
There is just a huge divide between what any politician will say to get elected and what he believes he is compelled to actually do once elected. I don't think he's "beginning to understand" anything. I think he fully understands the crazy ass chess game he's been playing all along. Actually creating the most transparent administration in US history is - well - an extremely subjective and pretty much immeasurable / untestable sort of claim to make in the first place. TONS of wiggle room. Also it's his last term, he doesn't have to do shit except finish out and collect public speaking fees and board compensation checks for - forever.
samstave 13y ago
Hah - you foolishly misunderstood the definition of the term "transparent"!! What he meant was that everything was transparent TO the administration. All the world an open book to the administration and its agents. Not only that, it even set it up in the classic American way, so contractors such as Booz Allen could profit from it!! You lowly pleb!

rosser 13y ago

I'm tempted to start taking odds on the redacted:non-redacted ratio in the released document.

xntrk 13y ago
95% redacted is my bet
- jlgreco 13y ago
  55% redacted is my bet. There are a lot of filler words in most documents. You can destroy a lot of meaning with only a few redactions.
x0054 13y ago
My guess is 20% reducted. But you have to remember, you can change the meaning of a sentence by removing just one word, or even a comma. The problem is, we will never know if we get the true meaning of the document. As an aside, if there ever will be the next Edward Snowden, I think he or she should collect all the phone records, email records, and other data for every person in congress. Release that data, and we will quickly see some change.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  Leak internal communications generated in response to the previous leak. Repeat recursively until you find the attractor.

rcavezza 13y ago

I just want to make sure I have this correct. 1.) Two years ago, a secret court ruled that this NSA surveillance is unconstitutional. 2.) The NSA made this decision secret and never released the ruling. 3.) The NSA continued its surveillance program that was ruled illegal by a court. Is this really what happened?

adestefan 13y ago
Or they changed the program to actually make it Constitutional.

UVB-76 13y ago

Here's the document: https://www.eff.org/document/october-3-2011-fisc-opinion-holding-nsa-surveillance-unconstitutional https://www.eff.org/document/october-3-2011-fisc-opinion-hol...