By John P. Mello Jr.     03/13/15 11:02 AM PT
    The American    Civil Liberties Union earlier this week filed a lawsuit    seeking to stop the National Security Agency from    indiscriminately snooping on United States Internet traffic.  
    Using a technique called "upstream" surveillance, the NSA does    a spinal tap of the Internet's U.S. backbone, which carries the    communications of millions of Americans, the ACLU explained in    its complaint filed with a federal district court in Maryland.  
    "In the course of this surveillance, the NSA is seizing    Americans' communications en masse while they are in transit,"    the complaint alleges, "and it is searching the contents of    substantially all international text-based communications --    and many domestic communications as well -- for tens of    thousands of search terms."  
    That kind of surveillance violates federal law, the First and    Fourth Amendments and Article III of the Constitution,    maintained the ACLU, which is representing in the lawsuit the    Wikimedia Foundation, the National Association of Criminal    Defense Lawyers, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International USA,    PEN American Center, the Global Fund for Women, The    Nation magazine, The Rutherford Institute and the    Washington Office on Latin America.  
    This lawsuit is similar to one filed in the past involving NSA    Director James R. Clapper and Amnesty International. That case    was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court. Backers of the latest    lawsuit, however, believe their case has stronger legs than the    previous litigation.  
    "Thanks to the Snowden disclosures and government    acknowledgments over the last 18 months, we now know more about    government surveillance than we did in Clapper v.    Amnesty," explained Ashley Gorski, an attorney with the    ACLU's National Security Project.  
    "That, for us, makes all the difference," she told the    E-Commerce Times, "and we think that will make a difference in    court as well."  
    In the Amnesty case, the Supreme Court ruled that the    parties bringing the lawsuit lacked standing -- that is, they    couldn't prove they were harmed by the behavior alleged in    their complaint. The reason they couldn't prove harm was that    they didn't know enough about what the NSA was doing to make    the connection between harm and behavior.  
    "Prior to the Snowden revelations and the government    acknowledgments, the public did not know anything at all about    upstream surveillance -- least of all that the NSA was copying    entire streams of Internet traffic and searching through them    for information about its targets," Gorski said.  
Originally posted here:
Lawsuit Challenges NSA Internet Dragnets