3 ms·
So all the defense the government used with the NSA database being overseen by the FISA court doesn't apply, there was no court oversight of this program. To b
by moe 12y ago
So all the defense the government used with the NSA database being overseen by the FISA court doesn't apply, there was no court oversight of this program.
To be fair, calling FISA a "court" is a bit of an overstatement[1].
It's very unlikely that FISA oversight would have stopped or changed this in any way. Nonetheless it might be interesting to learn why they skipped the fig leaf altogether in this case.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court#Criticism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intellige...
- rhino369 12y agoIt's comprised of legitimate federal judges. I'm not sure how much more you want.
- moe 12y agoRead the link in my comment, it goes into great detail about what FISA leaves to be desired. An NSA analyst sums it up as: "Kangaroo court[1] with a rubber stamp". [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_court http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_court
- rdtsc 12y agoPresumably if said judges worked in a coffee shop making and serving coffee, that coffee shop would not all of the sudden become a federal court?
- higherpurpose 12y agoFederal judges that never question NSA and automatically approve "3 month general warrants for mass collection". Where's the "oversight" in that? That's why it was put there, no? To have oversight over NSA. How can you have any oversight when you just tell NSA to "collect everything".
- CamperBob2 12y ago"Legitimate" federal judges appointed by one judge (to rule them all, presumably.)