SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
David Miranda is appealing a court decision that upheld the legality of his detention while carrying Snowden documents in 2013:
David Miranda, the partner of the former Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald, has launched a fresh appeal challenging the legality of his detention under counter-terrorism powers for nine hours at Heathrow airport in 2013. The hearing at the court of appeal in London is an attempt to overturn an earlier decision by a lower court that holding him under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 was lawful.
Around 60,000 people a year are held in such controversial port stops. The Home Office has argued that border controls exist to check on travellers where there is insufficient information to justify an arrest.
Miranda's first legal challenge was supported by The Guardian. This court of appeal challenge is funded by First Look Media, which publishes the online magazine the Intercept . The organisation said the appeal had been brought to defend freedom of expression and journalists' rights.
When Miranda was stopped in August 2013, he was carrying encrypted files containing journalistic material derived from the US National Security Agency contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden, his lawyer told the appeal court.
[...] Last year three high court judges dismissed the challenge brought by Miranda, accepting that his detention and the seizure of computer material was "an indirect interference with press freedom" but said this was justified by legitimate and "very pressing" interests of national security.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Thursday December 10 2015, @06:32PM
Does it ever end? The founding fathers didn't think it would. All the time, we have to roll back overzealous enforcement and bad, corrupt lawmaking. Power corrupts. If ever a day comes when power doesn't corrupt, then the War for Liberty will be won. Maybe in the distant future, after evolution has improved our behavior more, it will be possible to win. Meantime, the US mania to tote firearms around is a step back.
For this particular incident, here's hoping Miranda wins. A more limited outcome would be if police forces got it through their heads who their bosses really are, and pushed back against these supervisors and authorities who feel far too free to order police minions to violate civil rights.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 10 2015, @08:07PM
Meantime, the US mania to tote firearms around is a step back.
It was actually kinda clever the way they wrote it. They had a horrible problem at first in the revolution. The militia was woefully under armed and under trained. The militia could not be counted on in a real fight. If it were not for the french wanting to stick a finger in the British eyes crown the British would have won. They did not want a repeat of that.
It would be a different tale now. It would be more akin to what happened to the south vs the north. Brother on brother fighting over some ideal and one side strangling the other with a lack of food.
If some sort of revolution happened getting guns would not be a problem. Getting ammo would. Believe it or not most ammo does have a 'best used by' date. Go past that and the ammo better have been stored very very very carefully. In the back of cupboard is not that.