Bronco_Beerslug
09-29-2004, 02:27 PM
Nice! Finally starting to reel in some of this Ashcroft crap.
--------------------------------------
By Gail Appleson
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Surveillance powers granted to the FBI (news - web sites) under the Patriot Act, a cornerstone of the Bush Administration's war on terror, were ruled unconstitutional by a judge on Wednesday in a new blow to U.S. security policies.
U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero, in the first decision against a surveillance portion of the act, ruled for the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites) in its challenge against what it called "unchecked power" by the FBI to demand confidential customer records from communication companies, such as Internet service providers or telephone companies.
Marrero, stating that "democracy abhors undue secrecy," found that the law violates constitutional prohibitions against unreasonable searches. He said it also violated free speech rights by barring those who received FBI demands from disclosing they had to turn over records.
Because of this gag order, the ACLU initially had to file its suit against the Department of Justice (news - web sites) under seal to avoid penalties for violation of the surveillance laws.
Although the ACLU's suit was filed on behalf of an Internet access firm, the ruling could apply to other entities that have received FBI secretive subpoenas, known as national security letters.
The ACLU said that the Patriot Act provision was worded so broadly that it could effectively be used to obtain the names of customers of Web sites such as Amazon.com or eBay, or a political organization's membership list, or even the names of sources that a journalist has contacted by e-mail.
"This is a landmark victory against the Ashcroft Justice Department (news - web sites)'s misguided attempt to intrude into the lives of innocent Americans in the name of national security," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero.
"Even now, some in Congress are trying to pass additional intrusive law enforcement powers. This decision should put a halt to those efforts," he said.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&e=4&u=/nm/20040929/ts_nm/rights_patriot_dc
--------------------------------------
By Gail Appleson
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Surveillance powers granted to the FBI (news - web sites) under the Patriot Act, a cornerstone of the Bush Administration's war on terror, were ruled unconstitutional by a judge on Wednesday in a new blow to U.S. security policies.
U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero, in the first decision against a surveillance portion of the act, ruled for the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites) in its challenge against what it called "unchecked power" by the FBI to demand confidential customer records from communication companies, such as Internet service providers or telephone companies.
Marrero, stating that "democracy abhors undue secrecy," found that the law violates constitutional prohibitions against unreasonable searches. He said it also violated free speech rights by barring those who received FBI demands from disclosing they had to turn over records.
Because of this gag order, the ACLU initially had to file its suit against the Department of Justice (news - web sites) under seal to avoid penalties for violation of the surveillance laws.
Although the ACLU's suit was filed on behalf of an Internet access firm, the ruling could apply to other entities that have received FBI secretive subpoenas, known as national security letters.
The ACLU said that the Patriot Act provision was worded so broadly that it could effectively be used to obtain the names of customers of Web sites such as Amazon.com or eBay, or a political organization's membership list, or even the names of sources that a journalist has contacted by e-mail.
"This is a landmark victory against the Ashcroft Justice Department (news - web sites)'s misguided attempt to intrude into the lives of innocent Americans in the name of national security," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero.
"Even now, some in Congress are trying to pass additional intrusive law enforcement powers. This decision should put a halt to those efforts," he said.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&e=4&u=/nm/20040929/ts_nm/rights_patriot_dc