Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy The Courts

Supreme Court Refuses To Hear EPIC Challenge To NSA Surveillance 227

Trailrunner7 writes "The challenge to the NSA's domestic surveillance program filed with the Supreme Court by the Electronic Privacy Information Center ended Monday, with the court refusing to consider the challenge at all. EPIC had filed the challenge directly with the Supreme Court rather than going through the lower courts. EPIC, a non-profit organization involved in privacy policy matters, had asked the court to vacate an order from a judge in the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Court that had enabled the NSA's collection of hundreds of millions of Verizon call records under the so-called metadata collection program. The challenge hinged on the idea that the FISC had gone outside of its authority in granting the order."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Supreme Court Refuses To Hear EPIC Challenge To NSA Surveillance

Comments Filter:
  • Re:No surprise (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Daniel_Staal ( 609844 ) <DStaal@usa.net> on Monday November 18, 2013 @03:46PM (#45456955)

    Also: Congress is working on this issue. The Supreme Court really doesn't like to step on the toes of the other two parts of the government if it doesn't have to. Looking at the activity on this issue, it's likely they won't have to.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) * on Monday November 18, 2013 @05:01PM (#45457691)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 18, 2013 @08:29PM (#45459437)

    Correct me if I am wrong but I don't believe that's how your Constitution actually works. It supposedly outlines what the government can do and anything it doesn't say they can do, they can't do. It seems like the confusion comes from having the itemized amendments, which I believe at least one of the founding fathers argued would lead to this common misunderstanding.

  • by artor3 ( 1344997 ) on Monday November 18, 2013 @09:31PM (#45459815)

    Okay, you're wrong.

    The government can do whatever it wants until told to stop by someone in a higher position of authority. The only "laws" constraining their actions are the laws of physics. Congress could pass a law tomorrow establishing Zoroastrianism as the state religion, and the Constitution (being just words on a page) wouldn't do shit to stop them. The law would have to be struck down by a court.

    Nothing is unconstitutional until a court rules it so.

    How else could it possibly work?

Real Users never know what they want, but they always know when your program doesn't deliver it.

Working...