- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
Good find.
The decision is correct, but the reasoning was weighted on a technicality. From the article: "The court didn’t address the question of whether it would be constitutional for Congress to order such broad searches; it just held that Congress didn’t intend to authorize them."... "This was the right result -- but not necessarily because of privacy, which the court didn’t address directly at all. What was most wrong with the secret NSA orders was that they depended on a secret interpretation of the law, according to which “relevant” was assigned the broadest possible meaning. "
Still, it is a positive step; the decision is in line with the fourth amendment regardless and there was talk of relevance, implication of over-broad, over-reach, even if their decision did not hinge on it. Let us hope it doesn't end up at the SCOTUS, as presently constituted.
Respectfully,
O.A.
This is not that America (which may not have existed since 1859.) I predict the Dark Center court will rule for the federal government on this issue, and the Supreme Traitors will create weasle language for the new evil empire to continue to stir their cauldron of dictatorship. They will poke their noses into private matters of individuals until the people respond via force of arms.
I do not trust and have no faith in those who weasel run whatever poisoned thing America has become now.
Who is John Galt?
And all they did was update surveillance abuses, and cheered to the public how they protected our rights.
What a joke.
Reprobates, all of them.
Yet they will get as an aggregate 95% of the votes cast and not care which leftist candidate wins.
Frying pan into the fire
Whats the alternative? Bought and paid for Hillary?
http://freedomsback.com/pat-buchanan/...
Can you think of how many of your friends and neighbors can afford this version of free speech?
How free is that?
Fascist Free?
I personally know a rancher or two that have either already been under home based ankle cuffs or are currently being held without bail until next February.
The main part of the case was really about whether the plaintiffs had standing (Whether they could sue the NSA). The court said yes they did.
The government also argued that Judicial Review of the Patriot Act was not allowed. The court disagreed.
The government argued that even if the plaintiffs had standing the plaintiffs constitutional arguments would fail. The court sort of side stepped this issue and ruled that the Patriot Act did not authorize the broad searches taken on by the NSA. This leaves the constitutional issues open.
The case is being remanded (sent by to the trial court) for resolution. It is possible the trial court will take up the constitutional issues or it will punt and just rubber stamp the appeals court decision.
The media is focusing on the court using Snowden's revelations as evidence. This is also important.
design and fabrication information for nuclear weapons? -- j
.
Only the military should have secrets and these should be very restrictive (limited). In peacetime secrets should mainly limited to weapon systems and operational secrets should have a short lifetime. The real enemy that the US faces is not external, it is internal.
The cold war was a valid reason for a large standing military. But large militaries are always a threat to freedom and the US military has become a huge threat to our freedom.
The NSA should be eliminated and its few legitimate functions absorbed by the military. The CIA should be eliminated and its few legitimate functions absorbed by the military. The FBI should be eliminated. If the states feel there is a need for something like the FBI, they could create one by agreement and the federal government should/would have no part of how it is operated.