Mediaboss Marketing

Usually it's the big guys, or at least national and international organizations, that stand up to fight against the government. But on Monday, a nurse from Idaho will continue to fight the case she brought against Barack Obama and government intelligence agencies. Anna Smith says her Fourth Amendment rights were violated when the NSA collected data about her from phone records.

A district court ruled against Smith when she first started to fight the case, but now she has the backing of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the American Civil Liberties Union of Idaho.

The original case dates back to June 2013, shortly after the activities of the NSA first came to light. Now the EFF, ACLU, the American Civil Liberties Union of Idaho, and Smith husband have worked together to craft an appeal. The case will be heard at the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and will center on several areas.

One argument is that "neither Smith nor any other precedent authorizes the suspicionless collection of call records in bulk" and that the collection of such data is an invasion of privacy. The appeal also says that the government's mass collection of phone data violates the fourth Amendment and is unconstitutional "because it is warrantless and lacks probable cause".

This is not the first time the Electronic Frontier Foundation has become involved in a case against the government and the NSA, and it is unlikely to be the last. This appeal starts on Monday 8 December at 9:00 AM PST, and we'll be following along to see what happens.

Photo credit: bikeriderlondon / Shutterstock

Read the original:
Idaho nurse gains backing of EFF and ACLU in fight against the NSA

Walker should push to restrict subsidies for bad behavior.

Posted: Saturday, December 6, 2014 10:00 am

Taxpayers should have rights, too

A FEDERAL APPEALS COURT has upheld a trial court ruling that Floridas law requiring public assistance applicants to submit to drug tests as a condition of receiving aid is an unconstitutional violation of Fourth Amendment search-and-seizure protections.

The court ruled that the collection and testing of urine intrudes upon expectations of privacy that society has long recognized as unreasonable. ... By virtue of poverty, TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) applicants are not stripped of their legitimate expectations of privacy.

During his successful campaign for re-election, Gov. Scott Walker promised to pursue a similar drug-testing policy for Wisconsin. We dont think he should give up.

SUBSTANCE ABUSE IS one of the more common and severe barriers to finding and keeping a job. Its also one of the social pathologies disproportionately affecting at-risk populations. Police officers and prosecutors will tell you its one of the primary drivers behind criminal behavior. And prison officials will say a disturbingly large percentage of those entering the corrections system are substance abusers.

So, explain again: Why is society wrong to raise the bar and insist that people seeking tax-funded assistance are drug-free?

The legal system largely amounts to this: What one clever lawyer can put together, another can tear apart, and vice versa. So maybe theres a tweak or a turn to the Florida approach that could reach the same goal of discouraging drug abuse without running afoul of the Constitution.

We believe in Fourth Amendment protections as much as anybody, but we also believe taxpayers have no obligation to subsidize bad behavior. Governor Walker should continue looking for a way to keep his promise.

See the original post:
Taxpayers should have rights, too

Sen Rand Paul Defends the Fourth Amendment February 11, 2014
News in World START EARN MONEY NOW!!! http://lin.kim/2BKxw.

By: News in World

Excerpt from:
Sen Rand Paul Defends the Fourth Amendment February 11, 2014 - Video

I recently participated in a provocative and interesting panel on the Fourth Amendment and new technology during a conference at Georgetown Law. My co-panelists were Judge Richard Posner, Judge Margaret McKeown, DOJs Michael Dreeben, and Georgetowns David Cole. Georgetowns Laura Donohue moderated. You can watch the whole thing here via C-SPAN.

If you only want to watch the highlight, check out this 6-minute excerpt over the value of privacy between Judge Posner and David Cole. We had been talking about searching cell phones, and Posner expressed his view that cell phone privacy was no big deal. Cole disagreed, and the two of them debated the issue. I score this Cole 1, Posner 0.

Orin Kerr is the Fred C. Stevenson Research Professor at The George Washington University Law School, where he has taught since 2001. He teaches and writes in the area of criminal procedure and computer crime law.

Continue reading here:
Volokh Conspiracy: Panel discussion on the future of the Fourth Amendment

Fourth Amendment - Blaze, John, Adam

By: John Regula

Read more:
Fourth Amendment - Blaze, John, Adam - Video