Court rules FBI cannot issue "National Security Letters" under USA PATRIOT ACT

From the WaPo:

  1. Will the government appeal this decision?

  2. If so, will the ruling be upheld or reversed?

What do you think?

Yeah, BrainGlutton, what do YOU think?

These Linda Richmond threads of yours are getting mighty old. Start off the discussion with a point of view and a rationale. Sheesh.

Who is Linda Richmond?


Run along, now.

From SNL. Mike Myers played her, a talkshow host that would just bring up a topic and then say “discuss”.

(Edit: Beaten to the punch.)

BG, you must stop dragging innocent passersby by into your threads! This habit of yours of dragooning the disinterested into unwilling participation…well, it won’t do, it simply won’t do!

Well, I for one don’t see much participation in this, so it must not be that successful.

BrainGlutton believes that the proletariat will rise up and destroy the fascist dictators. Arguments aren’t needed when the plain truth of the evilness is put on display for the masses. People will just understand.

Well, then, I for one applaud any effort to rein in these goons. But TG, IANAL, and these threads have a tendency to veer into showcases for attorneys to display technical expertise. Not knocking it, mind you, but since I don’t know what bearing Section III, subparagraph C(3) has on the matter at hand, I prefer to butt out.

I think that referring to the *Washington Post * as “WaPo” is annoying. Could there please be some other way?

To answer the OP:

  1. Yes

  2. Reversed. Pigs and spooks nearly always get their way.

I’m happy to see that somebody remembered about those national security letters. Barton Gellman’s expose about them led to a resounding silence, then a couple months later the nation was up in arms about NSA wiretapping.
I’ll never understand why the first story went unnoticed and the second one turned into a huge scandal.
For those who don’t know, a couple excerpts:

I no more want to write it out every time than type “Wall Street Journal” instead of “WSJ.” Any suggestions?

Well, if you’ll read the linked story, this is the second time the National Security Letters have been ruled unconstitutional by the same judge. The first time, while appeal of the decision was pending, Congress stepped in and revised the PATRIOT ACT in hopes of correcting the perceived objection. Apparently the amendments did not satisfy Judge Marrero. So maybe this time appeal will resolve the matter, or maybe Congress (controlled by Dems this time) will act again.

I’ll believe it when I see it…everybody still cowers when the spooks/cops/military raise the spectre of “National Security”. It reminds me of that Voltaire quote “Those who can get you to believe absurdities, can get you to commit atrocities” in a weird way.

I don’t know what the best abbreviation for the Post should be…everything I can think of sounds like something else…The Post?..too much like the NY Post…WP? …doesn’t really convey what it is…

I know that when I google “Wapo”, the Post isn’t in the first few hits; when I google wash post, it’s first.

Anyway, WaPo sounds like a convenience store or something.

As far as I can tell, the specific part ruled objectionable was the inherent gag order. I applaud this.

Not to mention Higgins v. Wiggins, US XXXX

They will appeal and in the meantime ignore it as not in conformity with the administration’s view of the needs of national security.

After all it is the president who is charged with national security, not the courts, and no two-for-a-nickel federal judge is going to be allowed to stand in the way.

So if Congress corrects that bit – would the NSLs be less objectionable?

Less objectionable? Yes: The person who gets one now can say “Speak to my lawyer”. Before, they could not.

Nah. The proles are too ignorant/complacent. It’s the vanguard, man, the vanguard! [puff] Shotgun?