Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Secret law is not law. It is a fundamental breach of the social contract . [View all]LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)24. No, its secret law, not "just" secret execution
In Secret, Court Vastly Broadens Powers of N.S.A.
WASHINGTON In more than a dozen classified rulings, the nations surveillance court has created a secret body of law giving the National Security Agency the power to amass vast collections of data on Americans while pursuing not only terrorism suspects, but also people possibly involved in nuclear proliferation, espionage and cyberattacks, officials say.
The rulings, some nearly 100 pages long, reveal that the court has taken on a much more expansive role by regularly assessing broad constitutional questions and establishing important judicial precedents, with almost no public scrutiny, according to current and former officials familiar with the courts classified decisions.
The 11-member Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as the FISA court, was once mostly focused on approving case-by-case wiretapping orders. But since major changes in legislation and greater judicial oversight of intelligence operations were instituted six years ago, it has quietly become almost a parallel Supreme Court, serving as the ultimate arbiter on surveillance issues and delivering opinions that will most likely shape intelligence practices for years to come, the officials said.
WASHINGTON In more than a dozen classified rulings, the nations surveillance court has created a secret body of law giving the National Security Agency the power to amass vast collections of data on Americans while pursuing not only terrorism suspects, but also people possibly involved in nuclear proliferation, espionage and cyberattacks, officials say.
The rulings, some nearly 100 pages long, reveal that the court has taken on a much more expansive role by regularly assessing broad constitutional questions and establishing important judicial precedents, with almost no public scrutiny, according to current and former officials familiar with the courts classified decisions.
The 11-member Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as the FISA court, was once mostly focused on approving case-by-case wiretapping orders. But since major changes in legislation and greater judicial oversight of intelligence operations were instituted six years ago, it has quietly become almost a parallel Supreme Court, serving as the ultimate arbiter on surveillance issues and delivering opinions that will most likely shape intelligence practices for years to come, the officials said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us/in-secret-court-vastly-broadens-powers-of-nsa.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
79 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Secret law is not law. It is a fundamental breach of the social contract . [View all]
kpete
Jul 2013
OP
yeah, but most Americans are too fat and happy in their illusions that they actually matter
Nanjing to Seoul
Jul 2013
#2
Most Americans are in various stages of denial making it easy for the tyrants. nm
rhett o rick
Jul 2013
#8
No, it isn't a plebiscite on every law, but in a representative democracy a law has to be known.
enough
Jul 2013
#7
this is one point that I don't understand about the surveillance state debate....
mike_c
Jul 2013
#4
Yes, many people live in total deniablity, thinking that the authoritarian state will
rhett o rick
Jul 2013
#69
As Ron Wyden has said, 'if the people knew how they are using the law they would be
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#5
It should be noted that those decisions were made in a vastly different world.
Romulus Quirinus
Jul 2013
#19
I assume that you are arguing in good faith. I would appreciate it if you would do the same for me.
Romulus Quirinus
Jul 2013
#49
You do realize that this isn't the opinion of the court, but a quote from the amicae curiae brief
Romulus Quirinus
Jul 2013
#52
Here is an article in from Dr. Anthony Clark Arend of Georgetown University
Romulus Quirinus
Jul 2013
#54
According to the ACLU, it is the USA PATRIOT act which enables this level of surveillance, rather
Romulus Quirinus
Jul 2013
#56
Again I have to ask: why do some here trust 10 Repub judges to secretly define privacy?
magellan
Jul 2013
#13
It's debatable if you can even call it "law." It certainly isn't legal, no matter how the courts
leveymg
Jul 2013
#31
The rulings and interpretations are the substance of the law, the statute is just black letter
leveymg
Jul 2013
#66
No. Records are rarely sealed, except in FISA/nat'l security, and some civil cases by agreement.
leveymg
Jul 2013
#77
It appears Obama does not agree and is fighting to keep mysterious redefinitions of our law secret.
Dragonfli
Jul 2013
#58
But it sound like either the whole House or Senate is required to vote on it...
kentuck
Jul 2013
#75