Login  /  Register  | 3 premium articles left before you must register.

Justifying NSA spying

Published 09/21/2013 12:00 AM
Updated 09/21/2013 12:08 AM

The following editorial appeared recently in the Los Angeles Times.

In releasing an opinion by a secret court approving the bulk collection of Americans' telephone records, the director of national intelligence may have thought he would bolster support for the breathtakingly broad program whose existence was revealed by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden. But Judge Claire Eagan's explanation of the legal justification for the program is unpersuasive.

Eagan, a U.S. district judge from Oklahoma, is one of 11 members of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. On Aug. 29, she issued an opinion upholding the collection by the NSA of telephone metadata - information about the source, destination and duration of telephone calls but not their contents.

Eagan made two points: that the program didn't violate the 4th Amendment's ban on unreasonable searches and seizures, and that it was a lawful application of the Patriot Act, approved by Congress after 9/11. Regrettably, her first conclusion is accurate. In 1979, the Supreme Court held that citizens don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy in information they provide to "third parties" such as a telephone company. We have argued that the court needs to revisit that question in the Internet era.

Much less defensible is the judge's assertion that the data collection is authorized by a section of the Patriot Act that allows the government to obtain business records "relevant to an authorized investigation" of espionage or terrorism. Eagan concludes that the phone records of virtually every American are "relevant" because the government needs a "broad collection" of data to discern calling patterns that could identify terrorists. That strained interpretation has been disavowed by Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., R-Wis., a principal author of the Patriot Act.

After the public learned about the program, sentiment shifted on Capitol Hill and the House came within a handful of votes of curtailing it. Additional information - including this flawed reasoning of the court - will change even more minds about this violation of privacy.

Town News

Visit Zip06
Submit Your:  Submit Your News Submit Your Photos Submit Your Events
Most Recent Poll
Are you more concerned about security procedures at military facilities in southeastern Connecticut following the Washington Navy Yard attack?
No. The Coast Guard Academy, sub base, Electric Boat and the National Guard Camp Niantic have employed stringent safety regulations since Sept. 11.
36%
Yes. This incident shows all are vulnerable.
56%
I felt a bit better Wednesday when Defense Secretary Hagel announced he's reviewing security measures.
7%
Number of votes: 1036

No current items found