On Wednesday night, a federal judge struck down certain provisions of the Patriot Act regarding updates to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).  The full text of the judge's ruling can be read in the PDF document.  Last month, the ACLU was tracking the FISA modernization with great worry, but as Jason Pye states at The Liberty Papers, the constitution isn't just going to go away so far as the rights of the people are concerned.

In this specific case, the issue was centered around digital photographs of fingerprints lifted off plastic bags after the subway bombings in Madrid.  The FBI could not initially identify the prints, but eventually came up with a list of the 20 closest matches in their database.  From here, each "suspect" was investigated and assigned a risk score. 

The plaintiff in the case is Mayfield, a former Army officer and practicing lawyer with no prior criminal history.  The case alleges that the FBI unlawfully targeted Mayfield and subjected him to electronic monitoring in his home and his office, repeated searches of the home while he and the family were away, and surveillance as they traveled around town going to work and worship.  Why was Mayfield #4 out of 20 possible fingerprint matches?  His lawyer claimed it was because he had converted to Islam.

In the ruling, the judge finds that two sections of the Patriot Act are unconstitutional.  The opinion goes on to state that judicial oversight is always required in the surveillance of U.S.citizens.  Basically, the fourth amendment doesn't just go away because the FBI says you might be a terrorist.

Many analysts expect the executive branch to appeal this decision as soon as possible.

Comments

Add New Search RSS

Write comment
Name:
Email:	do not notifynotify
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:	-color-aquablackbluefuchsiagraygreenlimemaroonnavyolivepurpleredsilvertealwhiteyellow -size-tinysmallmediumlargehuge

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.12

Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved.