Obama trashes civil liberties too: track you everywhere

Topics: Civil Liberties
11 Feb 2010

From: Ervan Darnell

--000feaef43edb75f22047f5c0a0b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

The old argument used to be that even though the Democrats are economic
illiterates who will trash they economy, they aren't big brother like the
Republicans. That no longer seems to be the case:

"In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking
is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy"
in their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts. U.S. Department of
Justice lawyers say that "a customer's Fourth Amendment rights are not
violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records"
that show where a mobile device placed and received calls." [1]

The Fourth Amendment says:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,
and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized."

I cannot imagine what "papers and effects" means except that it means those
things you use only for private communication and expect to have privacy
attached too. If the person you are calling reveals a call, well, that's
how it goes. But "papers and effects" clearly covers written communication,
which by any plausible extension to the 21st century includes phone calls.
Even if you don't buy that, the purpose of the Fourth Amendment is to
prevent this kind of fishing expedition. Congress should not want to do
this, even if SCOTUS is compliant in the request.

The Justice Department's fig leaf of an excuse is even worse than that: not
only do people expect privacy from the phone company, even if they didn't
the argument is insufficient, because no warrant is issued to search the
phone company either!

---------------------
[1] http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html

--
Unsubscribe: kelvinistragnar+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/kelvinistragnar?hl=en
--000feaef43edb75f22047f5c0a0b
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The old argument used to be that even though the Democrats are economi=
c illiterates who will trash they economy, they aren't big brother like=
the Republicans. =A0That no longer seems to be the case:
iv>
"In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless
tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable
expectation of privacy" in their--or at least their cell
phones'--whereabouts. U.S. Department of Justice lawyers say that "=
;a
customer's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone
company reveals to the government its own records" that show where a
mobile device placed and received calls." [1]
The F=
ourth Amendment says:
" tyle-span" style "font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collap=
se: collapse; line-height: 19px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -w=
ebkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; ">The right of the people to be secure =
in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searche=
s and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upo=
n probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly descri=
bing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."=
;

t-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; line-height: 19px; -webkit-border-=
horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; "> >

t-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; line-height: 19px; -webkit-border-=
horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; ">I cannot i=
magine what "papers and effects" means except that it means those=
things you use only for private communication and expect to have privacy a=
ttached too. =A0If the person you are calling reveals a call, well, that=
9;s how it goes. =A0But "papers and effects" clearly covers writt=
en communication, which by any plausible extension to the 21st century incl=
udes phone calls. =A0Even if you don't buy that, the purpose of the Fou=
rth Amendment is to prevent this kind of fishing expedition. =A0Congress sh=
ould not want to do this, even if SCOTUS is compliant in the request. >

t-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; line-height: 19px; -webkit-border-=
horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; "> >

t-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; line-height: 19px; -webkit-border-=
horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; ">The Justic=
e Department's fig leaf of an excuse is even worse than that: not only =
do people expect privacy from the phone company, even if they didn't th=
e argument is insufficient, because no warrant is issued to search the phon=
e company either!

ple-style-span" style "border-collapse: collapse; line-height: 19px; -web=
kit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px;">=

---------------------
[1] p://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html">http://news.cnet.com/8301-=
13578_3-10451518-38.html




--

Unsubscribe: kelvinistragnar+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

http://g=
roups.google.com/group/kelvinistragnar?hl en
--000feaef43edb75f22047f5c0a0b--

Home