Remember the Constitution?

Well now. It isn't like we (meaning us DFH lefty bloggers) didn't tell you these bastards couldn't be trusted. We told you that if you gave them an inch they would take a mile. Sure enough, they decided to take two, since they're small.

Federal officials are routinely asking courts to order cellphone companies to furnish real-time tracking data so they can pinpoint the whereabouts of drug traffickers, fugitives and other criminal suspects, according to judges and industry lawyers.

In some cases, judges have granted the requests without requiring the government to demonstrate that there is probable cause to believe that a crime is taking place or that the inquiry will yield evidence of a crime.

These requests go against internal Justice Department recommendations that warrants be sought by federal prosecutors, based on probable cause. Because the orders are sealed at the request of the government, it is difficult, if not impossible to determine how often the orders are okayed or declined.

This month, a federal judge in Texas denied a request by a DEA agent for data that would identify the location of a suspected drug trafficker by the GPS chip in his cell phone. Magistrate Judge Brian L. Owsley did not just deny the request, he was scathing in his opinion, stating that the agent's affidavit failed to make the case and offer the "specifics necessary to establish probable cause, such as relevant dates, names and places."

Then the judge opted to publish his opinion and make it a part of the public record.

[Keep reading...]

In his opinion, he offered the details of the case, explaining in detail the shortcomings of the agents argument, in which the agent failed to provide "sufficient specific information to support the assertion" that the phone was being used to facilitate criminal activity.

The agent offered no substantiation of the allegation, instead merely arrogantly asserting that the suspect trafficked in narcotics and used the phone to do so. Owlesly wrote in his opinion that the agent simply stated that the agency had " 'determined' or 'identified' certain matters," but "these identifications, determinations or revelations are not facts, but simply conclusions by the agency."

Federal agencies are routinely applying for orders based on an absurdly low standard, when they should be seeking warrants based on probable cause.

And we warned you.

We told you that if you gave them special powers under the guise of "tracking terrorists" that in a New York minute they would be abusing their new, extra-Constitutional powers and going after Americans with them. We told you that if they were given a taste of that sort of power they would use it instead of shoeleather to prosecute criminal cases.

But instead of heeding our warnings, we were mocked, ridiculed and asked, in all seriousness, why we hated America and wanted the terrorists to win? And anyway, what did we have to hide? Hmmm?

This sort of thing might be right up some quivering, pissing coward's alley, but not mine. I actually give a rat's ass about the Constitution and liberty and freedom. I fear my government a hell of a lot more than I fear a few foam-flecked fundamentalists and their reich-wing enablers.

Extra-Constitutional powers granted to combat terrorism were quickly abused and misused by law enforcement to make criminal cases.

Next stop? Spying on political opponents.

Who is to say that isn't already happening?

It sure would explain the cowardice and spinelessness of a whole bunch of Democrats in congress.

I don't know about you, but the very first day that Congress is back in session, I will be calling all of my elected representatives and demanding a repeal of that un-American apostasy known as the Patriot Act.

There's more: "Remember the Constitution?" >>

Verizon Communications and Blatant Disregard for the Fourth Amendment

Executives from Verizon Communications, admitted to congressional investigators that they had willingly turned over the telephone records of their customers to federal authorities hundreds of times since 2005 without so much as asking to see a warrant or a court order.

The executives maintain that it is not their place to determine the legality or necessity of the requests because “to do so would slow efforts to save lives in criminal investigations.”

The company also revealed that the FBI, through the use of “National Security Letters” sought multiple generations of customer information. They sought, and received, not merely the customers call records, but the records of every person they called and all of the people they called as well. When it comes to information about our private lives, the government is a voracious beast, and Verizon seems all too willing to load up it’s plate in the buffet line.

The disclosures, in a letter from Verizon to three Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee investigating the carriers' participation in government surveillance programs, demonstrated the willingness of telecom companies to comply with government requests for data, even, at times, without traditional legal supporting documents. The committee members also got letters from AT&T and Qwest Communications International, but those letters did not provide details on customer data given to the government. None of the three carriers gave details on any classified government surveillance program.

From January 2005 to September 2007, Verizon provided data to federal authorities on an emergency basis 720 times, it said in the letter. The records included Internet protocol addresses as well as phone data. In that period, Verizon turned over information a total of 94,000 times to federal authorities armed with a subpoena or court order, the letter said. The information was used for a range of criminal investigations, including kidnapping and child-predator cases and counter-terrorism investigations.

Verizon and AT&T said it was not their role to second-guess the legitimacy of emergency government requests. (emphasis added)

The letters were released earlier in the week as Congress deliberated whether or not to grant immunity to telecommunications companies for their complicity and willingness to assist the government in spying on Americans. The incumbent executive, the companies, and their Republican cronies in Congress want the companies to be granted immunity in cases where they are sued by customers, pissed off about the invasion of their privacy. House Democrats refuse to consider such immunity without first learning just exactly how complicit the companies and the government are in these breaches of privacy.

"The responses from these telecommunications companies highlight the need of Congress to continue pressing the Bush administration for answers. The water is as murky as ever on this issue, and it's past time for the administration to come clean," said Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who, along with Chairman John D. Dingell (D-Mich.) and Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.)launched the investigation.

…[The]13-page Verizon letter indicated that the requests went further than previously known. Verizon said it had received FBI administrative subpoenas, called national security letters, requesting data that would "identify a calling circle" for subscribers' telephone numbers, including people contacted by the people contacted by the subscriber. Verizon said it does not keep such information.

"The privacy concerns are exponential each generation you go away from the suspect's number," said Kurt Opsahl, senior staff attorney with the EFF. "This shows that further investigation by Congress and the inspector general is critical."

Earlier this year, the Justice Department's inspector general found that the FBI may have improperly obtained phone, bank and other records of thousands of people inside the United States since 2003 by using national security letters and exigent letters, or emergency demands for records.

Michael Kortan, an FBI spokesman, said the bureau has suspended use of community-of-interest data "while an appropriate oversight and approval policy" is developed. He added that the inspector general is reviewing the use of those data.

Democrats have seen their efforts to force the Bush administration to admit the scope and breadth of the domestic spying it has engaged in since September 11, 2001. What revelations have come to light have been unmasked via press reports, FOIA lawsuits filed by advocacy groups, and Inspector General’s reports.

Verizon is certainly a company I would drop like a bad habit if I had any services through them. Fortunately, I don’t.

There's more: "Verizon Communications and Blatant Disregard for the Fourth Amendment" >>