12 ms·
Even if congress ends their blatantly unconstitutional endorsement of Section 702 spying, I still don’t see why anyone would believe that the government is goin
by idrathernot 2y ago
Even if congress ends their blatantly unconstitutional endorsement of Section 702 spying, I still don’t see why anyone would believe that the government is going to do anything other than massively expand their ability surveil every living moment of our lives. I don’t see the point in them trying to play it off like the system has any integrity whatsoever.
- duxup 2y agoCongress has been woefully short of curiosity or oversight that doesn't involve partisan politics ... let alone leadership.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- impossiblefork 2y agoWhy do you think section 702 seems unconstitutional? It looks pretty legal to me at least.
- rurban 2y agoThe federal court ruled otherwise.
- impossiblefork 2y agoI feel that it just forced them to actually folllow section 702 rather than letting them go about things as they liked.
- rurban 2y agosection 702 applies different unconstitutional rules for citizens and foreigners. foreigners have no privacy rights there. which is per-se unconstitutional, violating postal secrecy. they still think they are in war-times since the 30ies, and can store all meta-data and content in full. they are in war actually with all citizens.
- raincom 2y agoThe Fourth amendment "protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government". Then, third-party doctrine created by SCOTUS is a loophole for the fourth Amendment. Third-party doctrine says 4A "does not apply to information that is voluntarily shared with third parties". Section 702 allows to collect all communications between American citizens and non-citizens, and communications between non-citizens, without any warrant. The issue is: does one need a warrant to search any data about a US citizen in 702 collections? Here, the court says it violates 4A.