Fri Nov 15, 2013, 06:57 PM

Eugene (50,746 posts)

Justice Dept to Notify Defendants on Surveillance

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON November 15, 2013 (AP)

The Justice Department said Friday it will notify criminal defendants when the government has used evidence against them that was gathered through warrantless surveillance programs.

The department is undertaking a comprehensive review to turn up all cases in which such notifications need to be made, said department spokesman Brian Fallon. Attorney General Eric Holder first disclosed the review in an interview with The Washington Post.

The notifications will set the stage for a likely Supreme Court test of the Obama administration's approach to national security, which uses the National Security Agency's technical capabilities to gather phone and Internet data.

The high court so far has turned aside challenges to the law on government surveillance on the grounds that people who bring such lawsuits have no evidence they are being targeted.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/justice-dept-notify-defendants-surveillance-20906017

8 replies, 3535 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

8 replies	Author	Time	Post
Justice Dept to Notify Defendants on Surveillance (Original post)	Eugene	Nov 2013	OP
Nicely done. nt	Xipe Totec	Nov 2013	#1
Big fucking deal.	OnyxCollie	Nov 2013	#2
Not necessarily. The NSA's job is to monitor foreign communications.	randome	Nov 2013	#4
This ought to be interesting	Demeter	Nov 2013	#3
Yes, I think that must be the point.	bemildred	Nov 2013	#5
Who's overseeing THAT process?	snot	Nov 2013	#6
How would you EVER know?	randome	Nov 2013	#7
Ahem, all that's needed is that idea the Founding Fathers liked so much,	snot	Nov 2013	#8

Response to Eugene (Original post)

Fri Nov 15, 2013, 07:00 PM

Xipe Totec (43,020 posts)

1. Nicely done. nt

Reply to this post

Response to Eugene (Original post)

Fri Nov 15, 2013, 08:40 PM

OnyxCollie (9,958 posts)

2. Big fucking deal.

If the evidence that was collected without warrant is still valid, it overrules the Fourth Amendment.

Reply to this post

Response to OnyxCollie (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 16, 2013, 08:52 AM

randome (34,845 posts)

4. Not necessarily. The NSA's job is to monitor foreign communications.

If, in the course of that monitoring, they turn up evidence of a crime, that is not a warrantless 'search' anymore than it is when a police officer steps into a crack den and discovers a murder.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Response to Eugene (Original post)

Sat Nov 16, 2013, 08:43 AM

Demeter (85,373 posts)

3. This ought to be interesting

and a total mess.

Reply to this post

Response to Demeter (Reply #3)

Sat Nov 16, 2013, 09:06 AM

bemildred (90,061 posts)

5. Yes, I think that must be the point.

I predict panic and outrage, and then attempts to stop it.

Reply to this post

Response to Eugene (Original post)

Sat Nov 16, 2013, 09:14 AM

snot (10,245 posts)

6. Who's overseeing THAT process?

How will anyone know if DoJ fails to notify someone?

Reply to this post

Response to snot (Reply #6)

Sat Nov 16, 2013, 09:34 AM

randome (34,845 posts)

7. How would you EVER know?

I'm sure somebody, somewhere is violating a law or a regulation without our being aware of it right now.

You can have some other organization go into the DOJ and tear it apart to get all the paperwork it contains but how would you then know if THAT organization is to be trusted? Or that the DOJ kept paperwork on a subject in the first place?

There has to come a point when we stop worrying about what MIGHT be happening somewhere.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Response to randome (Reply #7)

Sat Nov 16, 2013, 06:35 PM

snot (10,245 posts)

8. Ahem, all that's needed is that idea the Founding Fathers liked so much,

called "checks and balances." I.e., you don't ask the foxes to police themselves; you give the chickens power over the foxes.

Reply to this post

Latest Breaking News (Forum)