ACLU vs NSA: Difference between revisions

From ACLU-NSA Argument Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Legal Documents: - added link to district court opinion)
(cwalsh: additional links, formatting)
Line 19: Line 19:
*[http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/28148lgl20070126.html ACLU's Response to the Government's Supplemental Submission on the Subject of Mootness] (we're still looking for a copy of the government's submission)
*[http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/28148lgl20070126.html ACLU's Response to the Government's Supplemental Submission on the Subject of Mootness] (we're still looking for a copy of the government's submission)
*[http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/eGov/taylorpdf/06%2010204.pdf District Court Opinion by Judge Taylor]
*[http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/eGov/taylorpdf/06%2010204.pdf District Court Opinion by Judge Taylor]
*[http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/26582res20060828.html Additional documents] from the trial and appellate proceedings
*[http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/26582res20060828.html Additional documents] from the trial and appellate proceedings, including Amicus Briefs


=== Related Articles ===
===Additional Resources===
*[http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/index.html ACLU pages on the case]


''Bush Stomps On Fourth Amendment'', Boston Globe Op-ed by Laurence Tribe
==== Related Articles ====
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/05/16/bush_stomps_on_fourth_amendment/


''The Case for Surveillance'', Boston Globe Op-ed by Charles Fried
[http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/05/16/bush_stomps_on_fourth_amendment/
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/12/30/the_case_for_surveillance/
''Bush Stomps On Fourth Amendment''], Boston Globe Op-ed by Laurence Tribe
 
[http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/12/30/the_case_for_surveillance/
''The Case for Surveillance''], Boston Globe Op-ed by Charles Fried

Revision as of 01:50, 4 February 2007

Welcome to the Berkman Center Wiki for the ACLU vs. NSA wiretapping appeal brown-bag lunch scheduled for ___.

ACLU v. NSA: Background

In January 2006, the American Civil Liberties Union (“ACLU”) filed suit in the Eastern District of Michigan against the National Security Agency (“NSA”), alleging that the NSA’s warrantless “Terrorist Surveillance Program” (“TSP”) and alleged call detail database are unconstitutional and in violation of federal law. The government argued both that plaintiff lacked standing and that the case was barred by state secrets privilege.

On August 17, 2006, Judge Anna Diggs Taylor held that plaintiffs had alleged sufficient injury under Article III to have standing and that the NSA’s practice of warrantless surveillance was both unconstitutional and in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”) and ordered the program halted immediately. Judge Taylor refrained from ruling on the issue of the alleged call detail database, citing state secrets privilege. Defendants immediately appealed and plaintiffs cross-appealed. Judge Taylor stayed the injunction pending appeal.

Oral argument was held before a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on January 31, 2007. The panel consisted of Judges Alice Batchelder, Ronald Gilman, and Julia Smith Gibbons. Ann Beeson represented the ACLU and Deputy Solicitor General Greg Garre represented the government. Central to the oral argument was the issue of whether plaintiffs, a group of scholars, journalists and attorneys who could not demonstrate that they were targets of surveillance, have standing to challenge the NSA.

Listen to the argument by clicking here (or right-click to save)

Legal Documents

Additional Resources

Related Articles

[http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/05/16/bush_stomps_on_fourth_amendment/

Bush Stomps On Fourth Amendment], Boston Globe Op-ed by Laurence Tribe

[http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/12/30/the_case_for_surveillance/

The Case for Surveillance], Boston Globe Op-ed by Charles Fried