Lounge of Tomorrow

€uromeinke, FEJ. and Ghoulish Delight RULE!!! NA abides.  


Go Back   Lounge of Tomorrow > Squaresville > Daily Grind
Swank Swag
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Clear Unread

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-18-2006, 11:31 AM   #1
Nephythys
Yeah, that's about it-
 
Nephythys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a state of constant crap to get done
Posts: 2,688
Nephythys is the epitome of coolNephythys is the epitome of coolNephythys is the epitome of coolNephythys is the epitome of coolNephythys is the epitome of coolNephythys is the epitome of coolNephythys is the epitome of coolNephythys is the epitome of coolNephythys is the epitome of coolNephythys is the epitome of coolNephythys is the epitome of cool
*finding link*

apparantly some analysts think this will be overturned as the people bringing the case may not have had standing to bring the case at all. Meaning they could not show that they had been harmed, or would be harmed in the future by the program.
Nephythys is offline   Submit to Quotes Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2006, 12:27 PM   #2
Alex
.
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 13,354
Alex is the epitome of coolAlex is the epitome of coolAlex is the epitome of coolAlex is the epitome of coolAlex is the epitome of coolAlex is the epitome of coolAlex is the epitome of coolAlex is the epitome of coolAlex is the epitome of coolAlex is the epitome of coolAlex is the epitome of cool
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nephythys
*finding link*

apparantly some analysts think this will be overturned as the people bringing the case may not have had standing to bring the case at all. Meaning they could not show that they had been harmed, or would be harmed in the future by the program.
The standings issue is certainly a grounds on which the ruling might be overturned and has nothing to do with the legality or constitutionality of the program itself.

However, since the government refuses to identify who has been the target of wiretapping it would be ironic that the government could make what would otherwise be considered unconstitutional de facto legal by making sure it is impossible to establish standing. (Well, in rereading the standing section of the decision I see that the judge made exactly the same point.)

I suspect the government will find it hard to win cases when their defense is "we can't make a defense because it would require sharing secrets."

The opinion does address the issue. To read the judge's take on the standing issue it is pages 15-24 of the PDF I linked above.
Alex is offline   Submit to Quotes Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:42 PM.


Lunarpages.com Web Hosting

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.