Commissar SFLUFAN Posted September 3, 2020 Share Posted September 3, 2020 Not only was it illegal, but it was also probably "ineffective" Quote In a ruling handed down on Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said the warrantless telephone dragnet that secretly collected millions of Americans’ telephone records violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and may well have been unconstitutional. U.S. officials insisted that the four - Basaaly Saeed Moalin, Ahmed Nasir Taalil Mohamud, Mohamed Mohamud, and Issa Doreh - were convicted in 2013 thanks to the NSA’s telephone record spying, but the Ninth Circuit ruled Wednesday that those claims were “inconsistent with the contents of the classified record.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CayceG Posted September 3, 2020 Share Posted September 3, 2020 Pardon him. Bring him back. EDIT: And free Reality Winner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwinIon Posted September 3, 2020 Share Posted September 3, 2020 Is this the first ruling we've gotten on this from a Federal circuit court? The article didn't mention it, but I wonder if this will go to SCOTUS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uaarkson Posted September 3, 2020 Share Posted September 3, 2020 "Mass surveillance program" ought to indicate extremely illegal from the name alone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewhyteboar Posted September 3, 2020 Share Posted September 3, 2020 5 hours ago, CayceG said: Pardon him. Bring him back. EDIT: And free Reality Winner. Free Reality Winner and lock her parents up instead for that gawd-awful name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar SFLUFAN Posted September 3, 2020 Author Share Posted September 3, 2020 3 hours ago, TwinIon said: Is this the first ruling we've gotten on this from a Federal circuit court? The article didn't mention it, but I wonder if this will go to SCOTUS. There was a similar ruling by the 2nd Circuit Court in 2015. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.