Judge rules NSA collection ‘almost certainly’ violates Constitution
A federal judge ruled that the NSAs collection of records almost certainly violates the Constitution, which could provide the ammo that those affected by the program need to bring litigation.
December 17, 2013 at 06:34 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Technology industry giants now have a crucial ally in their fight back against the National Security Agency's (NSA) surveillance tactics — the U.S. court system.
On Dec. 16, a federal judge ruled that the NSA's collection of records “almost certainly” violates the Constitution, which could provide the ammo that those affected by the program need to bring litigation.
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, in court in Washington, D.C., said that a 1979 Supreme Court ruling in Smith v. Maryland which allowed the NSA to collect citizens' phone records should no longer apply since technology and surveillance have both changed so much since.
“The almost-Orwellian technology that enables the government to store and analyze the phone metadata of every telephone user in the United States is unlike anything that could have been conceived in 1979,” Leon wrote. He also said that the NSA's bulk data collection and analysis “almost certainly does violate a reasonable expectation of privacy.”
According to the Wall Street Journal, the ruling should have little immediate legal impact, as Leon stayed the opinion until an expected government appeal is heard. Still, the case proved that the U.S. legal system is willing to criticize the government agency's data collection tactics. Previously, most lawsuits against the NSA were dismissed because plaintiffs could not prove beyond a doubt that they were a target of NSA surveillance.
Many, including Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy and attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union, publicly praised the ruling, with the latter saying it was a “carefully reasoned decision.” But others, such as former Department of Homeland Security official Stewart Baker, criticized it. Baker told the WSJ that the ruling was “a remarkably tone-deaf approach to a program that was started because we failed to identify some of the 9/11 hijackers.”
The ruling comes ahead of an important meeting on Dec. 17 between President Obama and the heads of multiple technology companies concerning government surveillance. Executives from Google, Facebook and Twitter are expected to attend.
InsideCounsel has had the legal ramifications of NSA surveillance covered from the beginning:
Law agencies ask wireless carriers for over 1.1 million customer cellphone records
Tech giants make appeal to reform government surveillance tactics
EU calls on U.S. to restore trust post-Snowden surveillance revelations
Qualcomm CEO says NSA surveillance affecting business in China
Facebook CEO says government “blew it” with surveillance tactics
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCrypto Industry Eyes Legislation to Clarify Regulatory Framework
SEC Official Hints at More Restraint With Industry Bars, Less With Wells Meetings
4 minute readTrump Fires EEOC Commissioners, Kneecapping Democrat-Controlled Civil Rights Agency
Trending Stories
- 1Veritext Legal Solutions Announces the Past Acquisitions of Three Alternative Dispute Resolution Firms
- 2Sarno da Costa D’Aniello Maceri LLC Announces Addition of New Office in Eatontown, NJ, and Named Partner
- 3LSU General Counsel Quits Amid Fracas Over First Amendment Rights of Law Professor
- 4An Eye on ‘De-Risking’: Chewing on Hot Topics in Litigation Funding With Jeffery Lula of GLS Capital
- 5Arguing Class Actions: With Friends Like These...
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250