NSA phone data collection 'illegal', US court rules

[Ichingcarpenter]

A US appeals court has ruled that bulk collection of phone records by the National Security Agency is illegal.
A lower court judge erred in dismissing a lawsuit challenging the program's constitutionality, the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals said.
The ruling overturns a 2013 decision which said the programme was constitutional.

The NSA's snooping was leaked by Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor who has since fled to Russia.

The latest verdict came after New York District Judge William Pauley had dismissed a legal challenge by the American Civil Liberties Union (Aclu) which argued that the way the NSA tracked million of calls contravened the US constitution.

The appeals court stopped short of ruling on the constitutionality of the programme, but said the government had gone beyond what Congress intended with the Patriot Act, the US bill aimed at thwarting terrorism.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32620742

[AuntPatsy]

1. Will justice prevail....stay tuned...

[Octafish]

2. Time to round up the crooks.

Should be easy once NSA checks the phone records.

As the investigation continues, we may learn just how much information was used to stop criminals as compared to blackmail good people.

[Ichingcarpenter]

3. The NSA's snooping was leaked by Edward Snowden

And he said it was illegal and now the courts agree.

[Ichingcarpenter]

5. If they did this and it 'illegal'' then it means

they broke the law and did something 'criminal' and against the law
I'm LOOKING AT YOU CLAPPER

[Enthusiast]

22. +1!

[WillyT]

4. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. But, revealing illegalities at the NSA is illegal.

Thank you again Edward Snowden.

[Ichingcarpenter]

9. Thank you ACLU too!!!

they went to court for us.

[riderinthestorm]

7. Obviously this judge hasn't consulted anonymous internet DUers claiming this is leeeeegal!

Including some posing as attorneys (cough)

[sabrina 1]

18. Lol, so true. Not to mention how 'legal' extra-judicial assassinations of US Citizens suddenly

became, according to some internet lawyers.

Due Process?

As Bush put it, so succinctly: 'So Quaint'.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. In other news...

Water is still wet and my coffee this morning was hot...stay tuned, news at 11.

On a serious note. The DC circuit is far more conservative. This will go all the way to SCOTUS

[jeff47]

10. Ah, so they dodged the 1979 SCOTUS decision that actually makes it legal.

A ruling in 1979 declared that phone records were a run-of-the-mill business record and thus not protected by the 4th amendment. Back then, a phone record was "this number called this number at this time and was connected for this long".

Cell phones have to report much more data to the phone company in order to work, but it's still a phone record. The 1979 ruling needs to be revisited to narrow the ruling. Or a law passed to narrow it (Yeah, that's gonna happen).

It's too bad this ruling is only about the Patriot act. And in some ways it's bad they won, because the ACLU can't now take it to the SCOTUS to revisit the 1979 ruling.

[Ichingcarpenter]

11. Yet for many its a great step forward and has

exposed the illegality of the practice into the world news forum for discussion and attention.

The world is watching this and I agree with your summation.

[jeff47]

17. Except it didn't really make the collection illegal. It changed the means of authorizing it (nt)

[Ichingcarpenter]

19. Yep...... that's correct

but like I said the discussion is worth the news

Its hit major news world wide.

[Emelina]

15. Very true. One more thing, why didn't the spy program pick up on the Texas shooters???

[jeff47]

16. It's really only useful information after-the-fact.

It's really only useful when you have someone to start with. The info lets them find associates of someone, but without a starting point it's not very helpful.

[riderinthestorm]

24. The NSA defenders here and in RL always bring up that the NSA stops terrorist attacks

when in fact they've done virtually none of that.

It does unfortunately remain a talking point.

[Ichingcarpenter]

27. Notice they are not here but posting

about Sanders and Hillary on the same page.

[riderinthestorm]

29. oh I've definitely noticed

[jeff47]

28. It probably does.

Once an attack happens, investigating the associates of the attacker probably prevents future attacks.

But you need that particular "cell" to conduct at least one attack in order to find them among the noise.

[sabrina 1]

20. That ruling had zero to do with LISTENING to conversations, READING mail, now email, or any of what

THIS ruling is about.

It's a great victory for the Constitution and for the Whistle Blower, Snowden and all the other Whistle Blowers who came forward, Binney, Drake et al, before him to report on the criminal, anti-Constitutional behavior of the NSA STILL under Bush Crony and Loyalist, liar and Corporate CEO of Defense Industry Corp, Clapper!

Or are you going to tell us there was also a SCOTUS ruling making Lying To Congress legal also.?

[Ichingcarpenter]

23. Hopefully this ruling will help further expose the

structures beneath the surface because
it is huge and cannot be seen by the masses.
And the foundation is buried under lies and power.

[jeff47]

30. Actually, this ruling has nothing to do with LISTENING to conversations or READING mail.

It's right there in the first sentence of the story. Here, I'll bold it for you.

A US appeals court has ruled that bulk collection of phone records by the National Security Agency is illegal.

Phone records are not LISTENING to conversations or READING mail.

Back in 1979, phone records were "this number called this number at this time, and was connected for this long". Now that we have cell phones, phone records also include location data - it's required to make cell phones work. Your cell phone has to tell the phone company "I'm here!!" in order for the phone company to send calls and texts to your phone.

Those records have absolutely nothing to do with listening in on a conversation, nor reading email.

You know what else has absolutely nothing to do with listening in on a conversation, nor reading emails of US persons? Snowden's leaks. If you actually read what he leaked, you'll find that every program except the phone record program explicitly excluded US persons.

But that isn't a sexy enough story, so people like you and Greenwald just drop off that part about US persons. It's a lot less inflammatory in the US when you say "The NSA is reading the Chinese Government's emails!"

[daleanime]

12. It's a start.....

[pa28]

13. Our resident DU legal eagles said bulk collection was authorized under the law.

Guess they were wrong (again).

[Emelina]

14. Hopefully the courts will stand firm with the US Constitution!

[hifiguy]

21. The government will give the Stalin response:

Joseph Stalin is famously said to have asked an adviser, dismissively, “How many divisions does the Pope have?”

Means nothing as long as the entire top layer of the US government is perfectly OK with it. They can defy any law with impunity.. Nothing wiil change.

[Rex]

25. Strange...where are all the DU NSA experts? They seem to be avoiding this thread.

No doubt they will find a way to throw the US court under the bus...give them time to confer with their think tanks.

[Hekate]

26. KnR Someday we may get our country back from the NeoCons. nt

[Hissyspit]

31. Kick nt