EFF Challenges National Security Letter 153
sunbird writes "The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court in San Francisco on behalf of an anonymous petitioner seeking to challenge a National Security Letter (NSL) the petitioner had received. NSLs are issued by law enforcement with neither judicial oversight nor probable cause, and have been discussed on Slashdot before. In response to the lawsuit, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a separate lawsuit against the individual who had received the NSL, requesting that the court order the recipient to comply with the NSL and asking the court to find that the 'failure to comply with a lawfully issued National Security Letter interferes with the United States' vindication of its sovereign interests in law enforcement, counterintelligence, and protecting national security.' Both cases are filed under seal, but heavily-redacted filings are available. The cases remain pending."
Re:Apple WTF?!?! (Score:2, Informative)
No such thing (Score:5, Informative)
No NSL is legally issued. They are searches without judicial oversight, and prior restraints on free speech. In violation of amendments 4 and 1. Anyone who made an oath to uphold the constitution would be breaking it if they enforced or issued a NSL in any way.
Re:No such thing (Score:5, Informative)
I am fairly certain the impugned rights are from the 5th and 14th Constitutional Amendments, and in particular the Due Process Clause.
Those too.
There does not appear to be any restraint on speech on these facts.
NSLs come with a gag order.
Re:Lawful my ass (Score:5, Informative)
He can't because the Consitution actually says:
In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
This isn't a dispute between states nor does it involve ambassadors, etc. so it falls under the apellate jurisdiction which is subject to Congress' regulation. This is fromArticle 3 section 2.
time for the Supreme Court . . . (Score:4, Informative)
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) ... guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution [wikipedia.org]
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects witnesses from being forced to incriminate themselves:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution [wikipedia.org]