Tag Archives: Third-Party Doctrine

“Will The Supreme Court Legalize Privacy?” TODAY at 3 p.m. ET (12 p.m. PT)

This morning the Supreme Court heard Carpenter v. United States, a case concerning legal protection for the privacy of location data collected by cell phone service providers. Will the Court reinstate Fourth Amendment privacy protection for our data? This and more on today’s show. See Program Notes, below, for the stories, etc., I plan to discuss.

Join in live, either by phone or in the chat room at BlogTalk Radio!

The show can be accessed here.

To access the show’s page at BlogTalk Radio, which will allow you to check out a past episode or to subscribe via iTunes and other services, use this link.

To access the iTunes store page for “Don’t Let It Go…Unheard,” where you can find past episodes, subscribe, and leave ratings and reviews (pretty please!), use this link.

This show is fueled, in part, by Bulletproof Coffee. And now you can help support it by fueling up with some Bulletproof Coffee yourself! Grab some Brain Octane Oil, which, combined with grass-fed butter and blended in your coffee, will help you start your day with sustained energy and focus.

Finally, if you would like to support the show directly, please donate using your Pay Pal account or Credit Card here.

Program Notes

The Supreme Court’s Opportunity to Legalize Privacy

Carpenter v. United States: The Court’s Opportunity to Legalize Privacy

United States v. Miller

Smith v. Maryland

Carpenter v United States at SCOTUSblog

Cops, Cellphones and Privacy at the Supreme Court

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Don't Let It Go...Unheard

“Edward Snowden vs. Privacy,” Today at 3 p.m. ET (12 p.m. PT)

While Edward Snowden has done heroic things to expose our government’s unjust mass surveillance programs, he’s unfortunately promoting the same theory of privacy that gave rise to those programs. Tune in to hear more. Other stories, too. See Program Notes, below, for all the stories, etc., I plan to discuss.

Join in live, either by phone or in the chat room at BlogTalk Radio!

The show can be accessed here.

To access the show’s page at BlogTalk Radio, which will allow you to check out a past episode or to subscribe via iTunes and other services, use this link.

To access the iTunes store page for “Don’t Let It Go…Unheard,” where you can find past episodes, subscribe, and leave ratings and reviews (pretty please!), use this link.

Finally, if you would like to support the show financially, please donate using your Pay Pal account or Credit Card here.

Program Notes

Bialetti 6-Cup Stovetop Espresso Maker

Your Keurig Machine May Be Covered In Bacteria And Mold

Edward Snowden just made an impassioned argument for why privacy is the most important right HT Stuart Hayashi

Edward Snowden Says Disclosures Bolstered Individual Privacy

House Intelligence Committee Urges No Pardon for Edward Snowden

Dragnet NSA Spying Survives: 2015 in Review

Word Games: What the NSA Means by “Targeted” Surveillance Under Section 702

AP, Other Media, Sue FBI for Details on iPhone Hacking Tool

Toward a Society of Privacy (MP3 download)

Legalizing Privacy: Why and How (MP3 download)

Beyond Reductionism: Reconsidering the Right to Privacy

Don’t Tread on My Metadata

20 Guantanamo detainees freed by Obama suspected of returning to terror HT William Bush

U.S. signs record $38B military aid deal with Israel HT William Bush

White House raises refugee target to 110,000

Ivanka Trump: US must ‘catch up with the times’ on guaranteed maternity leave

Exclusive: Hillary Clinton Campaign Systematically Overcharging Poorest Donors HT Glenn Jameson

How Bernie Sanders Die-Hards Echo Clinton Conspiracy Theories

Union Leader of New Hampshire Endorses Gary Johnson Over Donald Trump

Libertarians secure spot on all 50 state, DC ballots HT Rob Abiera

Christian bakers fined $135,000 for refusing to make cake for a gay wedding fight back HT Rob Abiera

Boeing 737 Max jets will launch the age of $69 one way trans-Atlantic fares and it should start in March 2017 HT Brian Yoder


HT Glenn Jameson

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Section 309 of HR 4681 (a.k.a. the “Obama Gets to Keep His Toys” section of the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2015)

Last week Congress passed HR 4681, the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2105

I’ve pasted the complete text of section 309, which is the section Justin Amash was concerned enough about to require a roll call vote be taken. (Only 59 representatives voted against it. Click here to see what your representative did.)

The section permits acquisition, retention and dissemination of “covered communications” subject to certain “limitations.” The limitations are weak, and seem to apply only to retention. Also, while the default retention period is five years, that can be extended for a variety of vaguely worded reasons (including that the communication is merely encrypted), and accountability is only to legislative intelligence committees. Moreover, these weak limitations don’t even have to go into effect for two more years. That means Obama gets to retain all his toys–unfettered access to our private communications–for the remainder of his term in office. How convenient.

Remember, it’s the third-party doctrine that has put protection of all these communications at the mercy of legislation (if not simply the “pen and phone” of our Chief Executive). The only way to fix this mess is to eliminate the third-party doctrine. Read how here.

SEC. 309. PROCEDURES FOR THE RETENTION OF INCIDENTALLY ACQUIRED
COMMUNICATIONS.
(a) Definitions.–In this section:
(1) Covered communication.–The term “covered communication”
means any nonpublic telephone or electronic communication acquired
without the consent of a person who is a party to the
communication, including communications in electronic storage.
(2) Head of an element of the intelligence community.–The term
“head of an element of the intelligence community” means, as
appropriate–
(A) the head of an element of the intelligence community;
or
(B) the head of the department or agency containing such
element.
(3) United states person.–The term “United States person”
has the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801).
(b) Procedures for Covered Communications.–
(1) Requirement to adopt.–Not later than 2 years after the
date of the enactment of this Act each head of an element of the
intelligence community shall adopt procedures approved by the
Attorney General for such element that ensure compliance with the
requirements of paragraph (3).
(2) Coordination and approval.–The procedures required by
paragraph (1) shall be–
(A) prepared in coordination with the Director of National
Intelligence; and
(B) approved by the Attorney General prior to issuance.
(3) Procedures.–
(A) Application.–The procedures required by paragraph (1)
shall apply to any intelligence collection activity not
otherwise authorized by court order (including an order or
certification issued by a court established under subsection
(a) or (b) of section 103 of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1803)), subpoena, or
similar legal process that is reasonably anticipated to result
in the acquisition of a covered communication to or from a
United States person and shall permit the acquisition,
retention, and dissemination of covered communications subject
to the limitation in subparagraph (B).
(B) Limitation on retention.–A covered communication shall
not be retained in excess of 5 years, unless–
(i) the communication has been affirmatively
determined, in whole or in part, to constitute foreign
intelligence or counterintelligence or is necessary to
understand or assess foreign intelligence or
counterintelligence;
(ii) the communication is reasonably believed to
constitute evidence of a crime and is retained by a law
enforcement agency;
(iii) the communication is enciphered or reasonably
believed to have a secret meaning;
(iv) all parties to the communication are reasonably
believed to be non-United States persons;
(v) retention is necessary to protect against an
imminent threat to human life, in which case both the
nature of the threat and the information to be retained
shall be reported to the congressional intelligence
committees not later than 30 days after the date such
retention is extended under this clause;
(vi) retention is necessary for technical assurance or
compliance purposes, including a court order or discovery
obligation, in which case access to information retained
for technical assurance or compliance purposes shall be
reported to the congressional intelligence committees on an
annual basis; or
(vii) retention for a period in excess of 5 years is
approved by the head of the element of the intelligence
community responsible for such retention, based on a
determination that retention is necessary to protect the
national security of the United States, in which case the
head of such element shall provide to the congressional
intelligence committees a written certification
describing–

(I) the reasons extended retention is necessary to
protect the national security of the United States;
(II) the duration for which the head of the element
is authorizing retention;
(III) the particular information to be retained;
and
(IV) the measures the element of the intelligence
community is taking to protect the privacy interests of
United States persons or persons located inside the
United States.

6 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized