Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Lone Lawyer Sues Obama, Alleging Illegality of Surveillance Programs

posted by n1 on Friday October 24 2014, @10:11AM   Printer-friendly
from the classified-[redacted]-[redacted]-case-dismissed-[redacted] dept.

AnonTechie writes with an article from Ars Technica:

Justice Department lawyers have asked a federal court in Pittsburgh to dismiss a sweeping lawsuit brought earlier this year by a local lawyer against President Barack Obama and other top intelligence officials.

In a new motion to dismiss filed on Monday, the government told the court that the Pittsburgh lawyer, Elliott Schuchardt, lacked standing to make a claim that his rights under the Fourth Amendment have been violated as a result of multiple ongoing surveillance programs.

Specifically, Schuchardt argued in his June 2014 complaint that both metadata and content of his Gmail, Facebook, and Dropbox accounts were compromised under the PRISM program as revealed in the documents leaked by former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Lone Lawyer Sues Obama, Alleging Illegality of Surveillance Programs | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 30 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by redneckmother on Friday October 24 2014, @06:42PM

    by redneckmother (3597) on Friday October 24 2014, @06:42PM (#109677)

    If ignoring the Constitution and Bill of Rights isn't a civil rights violation, I don't know what is.

    --
    Mas cerveza por favor.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Tuesday October 28 2014, @02:08PM

    by urza9814 (3954) on Tuesday October 28 2014, @02:08PM (#110853) Journal

    The question is if it violated *his* civil rights, not if it just violated civil rights in general. If your rights were violated, you have to be the one to sue. I can't sue on your behalf.

    Of course that's bullshit, it's a catch-22 situation -- they say he can't sue unless he was spied on, and he can't know if he was spied on because that would "compromise national security"...