Clash of Opinions: Judge rulesNSA spying legal, not 'Orwellian'

Full story: Fox News

A federal judge in New York has ruled the National Security Agency's massive data collection program is legal, one week after another federal judge ruled the opposite.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 3 of3
sheepleloveroyal ty

Bryn Mawr, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Dec 27, 2013
 
Another rationalizing establishment reactionary bureaucrat who is more worried about their own butt. Law by judicial activism. This is just as bad as the DNA sample ruling in which the court failed miserably to differentiate from a reproduction of a finger print to the seizure of personal material or dna. These judges seem to rationalize more than a two bit crack junkie begging for money.

Is it coincidence that this ruling comes from a nanny state judge.'It's not Orwellian' is an opinion. NOT a legal justification for their personal decision.
lamer

Piqua, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Dec 27, 2013
 
i think you are going a bit overboard there. I try to follow these cases pretty closing so let me try to bring some light to the matter.

Currently there are many cases in different courts testing the legality of many of these surveillance laws. These cases have been brought by different groups of people; sometimes the same group such as the ACLU filing multiple suits in different locations for different or the same programs.

Some of these suits focus narrowly on a specific program or some even deeper into specific provisions of a program and not the program itself. And other lawsuits like the one in this article are rather large in scope and focus more on say, the whole spying apparatus. Now remember in this type of suit, it only applies to americans on american soil. And these broad cases tend to lose right out of the gate, but sometime they get brought back on appeal.

Now the more focused suits tend to do much better as you can get into more detail on the exact infringement of rights. On the other side, many of the surveillance laws are based on 1970s telecommunication laws when telecom as we know it was in its infancy. Since those laws are so very broad, it make for easy legal gymnastic to justify the legality of these programs.

Remember that a judge's job is not to decide right or wrong but legal or illegal.
sheepleloveroyal ty

Bryn Mawr, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Dec 27, 2013
 
......

"Remember that a judge's job is not to decide right or wrong but legal or illegal."

Exactly. So when I see things it's 'not Orwellian" or it only "works" if everything is collected I see a rationalization , NOT a legal justification.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 3 of3
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Terrorism Discussions

Search the Terrorism Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Why should Australians fear from Muslims? (Dec '07) 1 hr Muslims HATE Easter 42,727
'The War Is Not Over' (Sep '06) 8 hr Hot doggie 276,166
Cheney pushed to widen eavesdropping - NY Times (May '06) 11 hr swedenforever 15
Kenya sends 91 Somalis to Mogadishu amid crackdown 12 hr moreantsje 1
Video shows large al Qaeda meeting 12 hr Fred 29
Paramount/PhotofestJust Plane Weird From accide... 18 hr jay dew singh 1
NATO supporting al-Qaeda in Syria? Wed Save Kessab 2
•••
•••
•••
•••