[liberationtech] EFF: National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[Katitza Rodriguez]

Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release

For Immediate Release: Friday, March 15, 2013

Contact:

Matt Zimmerman
  Senior Staff Attorney
  Electronic Frontier Foundation
  ma...@eff.org
  +1 415 436-9333 x127

Cindy Cohn
  Legal Director
  Electronic Frontier Foundation
  ci...@eff.org
  +1 415 436-9333 x108 (office), +1 415 307-2148 (cell)

Kurt Opsahl
  Senior Staff Attorney
  Electronic Frontier Foundation
  k...@eff.org
  +1 415 436-9333 x106

National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal
Judge Rules

Court Finds NSL Statutes Violate First Amendment and
Separation of Powers

San Francisco - A federal district court judge in San
Francisco has ruled that National Security Letter (NSL)
provisions in federal law violate the Constitution.  The
decision came in a lawsuit challenging a NSL on behalf of
an unnamed telecommunications company represented by the
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

In the ruling publicly released today, Judge Susan Illston
ordered that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) stop
issuing NSLs and cease enforcing the gag provision in this
or any other case.  The landmark ruling is stayed for 90
days to allow the government to appeal.

"We are very pleased that the court recognized the fatal
constitutional shortcomings of the NSL statute," said EFF
Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman.  "The government's
gags have truncated the public debate on these
controversial surveillance tools.  Our client looks forward
to the day when it can publicly discuss its experience."

The controversial NSL provisions EFF challenged on behalf
of the unnamed client allow the FBI to issue administrative
letters -- on its own authority and without court approval
-- to telecommunications companies demanding information
about their customers.  The controversial provisions also
permit the FBI to permanently gag service providers from
revealing anything about the NSLs, including the fact that
a demand was made, which prevents providers from notifying
either their customers or the public.  The limited judicial
review provisions essentially write the courts out of the
process.

In today's ruling, the court held that the gag order
provisions of the statute violate the First Amendment and
that the review procedures violate separation of powers.
Because those provisions were not separable from the rest
of the statute, the court declared the entire statute
unconstitutional.  In addressing the concerns of the
service provider, the court noted: "Petitioner was adamant
about its desire to speak publicly about the fact that it
received the NSL at issue to further inform the ongoing
public debate."

"The First Amendment prevents the government from silencing
people and stopping them from criticizing its use of
executive surveillance power," said EFF Legal Director
Cindy Cohn.  "The NSL statute has long been a concern of
many Americans, and this small step should help restore
balance between liberty and security."

EFF first brought this challenge on behalf of its client in
May of 2011.

For the full order:
https://www.eff.org/document/nsl-ruling-march-14-2013

For more on this case:
https://www.eff.org/cases/re-matter-2011-national-security-letter

For this release:
https://www.eff.org/press/releases/national-security-letters-are-unconstitutional-federal-judge-rules

About EFF

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading
organization protecting civil liberties in the digital
world. Founded in 1990, we defend free speech online, fight
illegal surveillance, promote the rights of digital
innovators, and work to ensure that the rights and freedoms
we enjoy are enhanced, rather than eroded, as our use of
technology grows. EFF is a member-supported organization.
Find out more athttps://www.eff.org.


-end-





--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] EFF: National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[Nadim Kobeissi]

I just want to say that I'm absolutely stunned by this and want to
congratulate everyone involved for setting an important precedent not just
for the U.S., but the whole world.

 Amazing stuff.

NK


On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Katitza Rodriguez  wrote:

>
>
> Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release
>
> For Immediate Release: Friday, March 15, 2013
>
> Contact:
>
> Matt Zimmerman
>   Senior Staff Attorney
>   Electronic Frontier Foundation
>   ma...@eff.org
>   +1 415 436-9333 x127
>
> Cindy Cohn
>   Legal Director
>   Electronic Frontier Foundation
>   ci...@eff.org
>   +1 415 436-9333 x108 (office), +1 415 307-2148 (cell)
>
> Kurt Opsahl
>   Senior Staff Attorney
>   Electronic Frontier Foundation
>   k...@eff.org
>   +1 415 436-9333 x106
>
> National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal
> Judge Rules
>
> Court Finds NSL Statutes Violate First Amendment and
> Separation of Powers
>
> San Francisco - A federal district court judge in San
> Francisco has ruled that National Security Letter (NSL)
> provisions in federal law violate the Constitution.  The
> decision came in a lawsuit challenging a NSL on behalf of
> an unnamed telecommunications company represented by the
> Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
>
> In the ruling publicly released today, Judge Susan Illston
> ordered that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) stop
> issuing NSLs and cease enforcing the gag provision in this
> or any other case.  The landmark ruling is stayed for 90
> days to allow the government to appeal.
>
> "We are very pleased that the court recognized the fatal
> constitutional shortcomings of the NSL statute," said EFF
> Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman.  "The government's
> gags have truncated the public debate on these
> controversial surveillance tools.  Our client looks forward
> to the day when it can publicly discuss its experience."
>
> The controversial NSL provisions EFF challenged on behalf
> of the unnamed client allow the FBI to issue administrative
> letters -- on its own authority and without court approval
> -- to telecommunications companies demanding information
> about their customers.  The controversial provisions also
> permit the FBI to permanently gag service providers from
> revealing anything about the NSLs, including the fact that
> a demand was made, which prevents providers from notifying
> either their customers or the public.  The limited judicial
> review provisions essentially write the courts out of the
> process.
>
> In today's ruling, the court held that the gag order
> provisions of the statute violate the First Amendment and
> that the review procedures violate separation of powers.
> Because those provisions were not separable from the rest
> of the statute, the court declared the entire statute
> unconstitutional.  In addressing the concerns of the
> service provider, the court noted: "Petitioner was adamant
> about its desire to speak publicly about the fact that it
> received the NSL at issue to further inform the ongoing
> public debate."
>
> "The First Amendment prevents the government from silencing
> people and stopping them from criticizing its use of
> executive surveillance power," said EFF Legal Director
> Cindy Cohn.  "The NSL statute has long been a concern of
> many Americans, and this small step should help restore
> balance between liberty and security."
>
> EFF first brought this challenge on behalf of its client in
> May of 2011.
>
> For the full order:
> https://www.eff.org/document/**nsl-ruling-march-14-2013
>
> For more on this case:
> https://www.eff.org/cases/re-**matter-2011-national-security-**letter
>
> For this release:
> https://www.eff.org/press/**releases/national-security-**
> letters-are-unconstitutional-**federal-judge-rules
>
> About EFF
>
> The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading
> organization protecting civil liberties in the digital
> world. Founded in 1990, we defend free speech online, fight
> illegal surveillance, promote the rights of digital
> innovators, and work to ensure that the rights and freedoms
> we enjoy are enhanced, rather than eroded, as our use of
> technology grows. EFF is a member-supported organization.
> Find out more athttps://www.eff.org.
>
>
> -end-
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/**mailman/listinfo/**liberationtech
>
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] EFF: National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[Travis McCrea]

While I would love to cheer this on as a victory, this will be appealed and 
then my only assumption is that the government will keep crying "state secrets" 
until a judge listens and complies stopping all further progress. I want to be 
optimistic, but have watched this happen so many times that it's really hard to 
be.

That being said, congratulations to the EFF and everyone working on this 
because it was (and will continue to be) an uphill battle.

Travis McCrea
Pirate Party of Canada
The Ultimate Ebook Library

Phone: 1(206)552-8728 US Call/Text
IRC: irc.freenode.net, irc.pirateirc.net (TeamColtra or TravisMcCrea)
Web: travismccrea.com
IM: teamcol...@451.im (jabber) teamcoltra (AIM)

On 2013-03-15, at 8:30 PM, Katitza Rodriguez  wrote:

> 
> 
> Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release
> 
> For Immediate Release: Friday, March 15, 2013
> 
> Contact:
> 
> Matt Zimmerman
>  Senior Staff Attorney
>  Electronic Frontier Foundation
>  ma...@eff.org
>  +1 415 436-9333 x127
> 
> Cindy Cohn
>  Legal Director
>  Electronic Frontier Foundation
>  ci...@eff.org
>  +1 415 436-9333 x108 (office), +1 415 307-2148 (cell)
> 
> Kurt Opsahl
>  Senior Staff Attorney
>  Electronic Frontier Foundation
>  k...@eff.org
>  +1 415 436-9333 x106
> 
> National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal
> Judge Rules
> 
> Court Finds NSL Statutes Violate First Amendment and
> Separation of Powers
> 
> San Francisco - A federal district court judge in San
> Francisco has ruled that National Security Letter (NSL)
> provisions in federal law violate the Constitution.  The
> decision came in a lawsuit challenging a NSL on behalf of
> an unnamed telecommunications company represented by the
> Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
> 
> In the ruling publicly released today, Judge Susan Illston
> ordered that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) stop
> issuing NSLs and cease enforcing the gag provision in this
> or any other case.  The landmark ruling is stayed for 90
> days to allow the government to appeal.
> 
> "We are very pleased that the court recognized the fatal
> constitutional shortcomings of the NSL statute," said EFF
> Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman.  "The government's
> gags have truncated the public debate on these
> controversial surveillance tools.  Our client looks forward
> to the day when it can publicly discuss its experience."
> 
> The controversial NSL provisions EFF challenged on behalf
> of the unnamed client allow the FBI to issue administrative
> letters -- on its own authority and without court approval
> -- to telecommunications companies demanding information
> about their customers.  The controversial provisions also
> permit the FBI to permanently gag service providers from
> revealing anything about the NSLs, including the fact that
> a demand was made, which prevents providers from notifying
> either their customers or the public.  The limited judicial
> review provisions essentially write the courts out of the
> process.
> 
> In today's ruling, the court held that the gag order
> provisions of the statute violate the First Amendment and
> that the review procedures violate separation of powers.
> Because those provisions were not separable from the rest
> of the statute, the court declared the entire statute
> unconstitutional.  In addressing the concerns of the
> service provider, the court noted: "Petitioner was adamant
> about its desire to speak publicly about the fact that it
> received the NSL at issue to further inform the ongoing
> public debate."
> 
> "The First Amendment prevents the government from silencing
> people and stopping them from criticizing its use of
> executive surveillance power," said EFF Legal Director
> Cindy Cohn.  "The NSL statute has long been a concern of
> many Americans, and this small step should help restore
> balance between liberty and security."
> 
> EFF first brought this challenge on behalf of its client in
> May of 2011.
> 
> For the full order:
> https://www.eff.org/document/nsl-ruling-march-14-2013
> 
> For more on this case:
> https://www.eff.org/cases/re-matter-2011-national-security-letter
> 
> For this release:
> https://www.eff.org/press/releases/national-security-letters-are-unconstitutional-federal-judge-rules
> 
> About EFF
> 
> The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading
> organization protecting civil liberties in the digital
> world. Founded in 1990, we defend free speech online, fight
> illegal surveillance, promote the rights of digital
> innovators, and work to ensure that the rights and freedoms
> we enjoy are enhanced, rather than eroded, as our use of
> technology grows. EFF is a member-supported organization.
> Find out more athttps://www.eff.org.
> 
> 
>-end-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsu

Re: [liberationtech] EFF: National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[Ali-Reza Anghaie]

Travis, while your sentiment is a familiar feeling to a lot of people -
this is still a significant step. The harder this is pushed, the more
exposure it gets, the more difficult it is to continue to extend the airs
of secrecy in every direction. Indeed you get a sense with the verbiage in
rulings (this, the CIA Drones ruling) that Judges themselves are
increasingly fed up.

These wins, even if not permanent, are very meaningful.

Well done. Well done indeed. -Ali



On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 12:29 AM, Travis McCrea  wrote:

> While I would love to cheer this on as a victory, this will be appealed
> and then my only assumption is that the government will keep crying "state
> secrets" until a judge listens and complies stopping all further progress.
> I want to be optimistic, but have watched this happen so many times that
> it's really hard to be.
>
> That being said, congratulations to the EFF and everyone working on this
> because it was (and will continue to be) an uphill battle.
>
> *Travis McCrea*
> Pirate Party of Canada
> The Ultimate Ebook Library
>
> Phone: 1(206)552-8728 US Call/Text
> IRC: irc.freenode.net, irc.pirateirc.net (TeamColtra or TravisMcCrea)
> Web: travismccrea.com
> IM: teamcol...@451.im (jabber) teamcoltra (AIM)
>
> On 2013-03-15, at 8:30 PM, Katitza Rodriguez  wrote:
>
>
>
> Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release
>
> For Immediate Release: Friday, March 15, 2013
>
> Contact:
>
> Matt Zimmerman
>  Senior Staff Attorney
>  Electronic Frontier Foundation
>  ma...@eff.org
>  +1 415 436-9333 x127
>
> Cindy Cohn
>  Legal Director
>  Electronic Frontier Foundation
>  ci...@eff.org
>  +1 415 436-9333 x108 (office), +1 415 307-2148 (cell)
>
> Kurt Opsahl
>  Senior Staff Attorney
>  Electronic Frontier Foundation
>  k...@eff.org
>  +1 415 436-9333 x106
>
> National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal
> Judge Rules
>
> Court Finds NSL Statutes Violate First Amendment and
> Separation of Powers
>
> San Francisco - A federal district court judge in San
> Francisco has ruled that National Security Letter (NSL)
> provisions in federal law violate the Constitution.  The
> decision came in a lawsuit challenging a NSL on behalf of
> an unnamed telecommunications company represented by the
> Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
>
> In the ruling publicly released today, Judge Susan Illston
> ordered that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) stop
> issuing NSLs and cease enforcing the gag provision in this
> or any other case.  The landmark ruling is stayed for 90
> days to allow the government to appeal.
>
> "We are very pleased that the court recognized the fatal
> constitutional shortcomings of the NSL statute," said EFF
> Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman.  "The government's
> gags have truncated the public debate on these
> controversial surveillance tools.  Our client looks forward
> to the day when it can publicly discuss its experience."
>
> The controversial NSL provisions EFF challenged on behalf
> of the unnamed client allow the FBI to issue administrative
> letters -- on its own authority and without court approval
> -- to telecommunications companies demanding information
> about their customers.  The controversial provisions also
> permit the FBI to permanently gag service providers from
> revealing anything about the NSLs, including the fact that
> a demand was made, which prevents providers from notifying
> either their customers or the public.  The limited judicial
> review provisions essentially write the courts out of the
> process.
>
> In today's ruling, the court held that the gag order
> provisions of the statute violate the First Amendment and
> that the review procedures violate separation of powers.
> Because those provisions were not separable from the rest
> of the statute, the court declared the entire statute
> unconstitutional.  In addressing the concerns of the
> service provider, the court noted: "Petitioner was adamant
> about its desire to speak publicly about the fact that it
> received the NSL at issue to further inform the ongoing
> public debate."
>
> "The First Amendment prevents the government from silencing
> people and stopping them from criticizing its use of
> executive surveillance power," said EFF Legal Director
> Cindy Cohn.  "The NSL statute has long been a concern of
> many Americans, and this small step should help restore
> balance between liberty and security."
>
> EFF first brought this challenge on behalf of its client in
> May of 2011.
>
> For the full order:
> https://www.eff.org/document/nsl-ruling-march-14-2013
>
> For more on this case:
> https://www.eff.org/cases/re-matter-2011-national-security-letter
>
> For this release:
>
> https://www.eff.org/press/releases/national-security-letters-are-unconstitutional-federal-judge-rules
>
> About EFF
>
> The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading
> organization protecting civil liberties in the digital
> world. Founded in 1990, we defend free speech online, fight
> ille

Re: [liberationtech] EFF: National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[Griffin Boyce]

Ali-Reza Anghaie  wrote:

> These wins, even if not permanent, are very meaningful.
>
> Well done. Well done indeed. -Ali
>

  They also give a window in which more positive action can happen.
 Despite being very busy, I'm asking Twitter for a comment on the ruling.
 Whether or not they respond, I'm sending them a formal request for status
of my accounts, and hope that others will follow suit.

  Tonight I told someone whose accounts have certainly been subject to NSL
requests that this had been declared unconstitutional.  I will never forget
the look on their face

  This entire case has been extremely important and necessary for us to
move forward.  As activists, sure.  But as a people also.  These ridiculous
legal maneuverings have been allowed to continue for far too long.  It's a
good day for everyone.

~Griffin

-- 
"What do you think Indians are supposed to look like?
What's the real difference between an eagle feather fan
and a pink necktie? Not much."
~Sherman Alexie

PGP Key etc: https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/User:Fontaine
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] EFF: National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[Danny O'Brien]

On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 01:31:19AM -0400, Griffin Boyce wrote:
> Ali-Reza Anghaie  wrote:
> 
> These wins, even if not permanent, are very meaningful.
> 
> Well done. Well done indeed. -Ali
> 
> 
>   They also give a window in which more positive action can happen.  Despite
> being very busy, I'm asking Twitter for a comment on the ruling.  Whether or
> not they respond, I'm sending them a formal request for status of my accounts,
> and hope that others will follow suit.
> 

I think that's a great idea from an advocacy point of view -- but I
should point out that while the judge ruled the nondisclosure aspect of
NSLs unconstitutional, she also stayed her own judgement pending appeal,
which is to say that the current secret state of NSLs remain in place
while a higher court considers the matter.

Well actually, they stop being secret in 90 days if the government does
not appeal. I have weirdest feeling that the DoJ might seek to take this
fight a bit further however.

The ruling as ever, is worth reading in full. 
https://www.eff.org/cases/re-matter-2011-national-security-letter

d.

-- 
International Director, EFF | +1 415 436 9333 x150 | 454 Shotwell St, SF, CA, US
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] EFF: National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[Shava Nerad]

This also gives morale to the DHS professionals holding on by their
fingernails until civil liberties are restored and they don't have to live
in an environment of compromised ethics to maintain their careers while we
outsiders effect reform.

Rather like the diplomatic corps professionals under the Bush
administration who had to just take a siege mentality - about their own
people.  PATRIOT has been in place for a decade now - it's a long time to
try to stay sane in an organization where the young turks think this is how
it's always been and is supposed to be.  Yet there are professionals in
every three letter agency trying to ve moderating influences...possibly
kicking themselves for feeling a little more optimistic today.

Heh...

yrs,



Shava Nerad
shav...@gmail.com
On Mar 16, 2013 1:31 AM, "Griffin Boyce"  wrote:

> Ali-Reza Anghaie  wrote:
>
>> These wins, even if not permanent, are very meaningful.
>>
>> Well done. Well done indeed. -Ali
>>
>
>   They also give a window in which more positive action can happen.
>  Despite being very busy, I'm asking Twitter for a comment on the ruling.
>  Whether or not they respond, I'm sending them a formal request for status
> of my accounts, and hope that others will follow suit.
>
>   Tonight I told someone whose accounts have certainly been subject to NSL
> requests that this had been declared unconstitutional.  I will never forget
> the look on their face
>
>   This entire case has been extremely important and necessary for us to
> move forward.  As activists, sure.  But as a people also.  These ridiculous
> legal maneuverings have been allowed to continue for far too long.  It's a
> good day for everyone.
>
> ~Griffin
>
> --
> "What do you think Indians are supposed to look like?
> What's the real difference between an eagle feather fan
> and a pink necktie? Not much."
> ~Sherman Alexie
>
> PGP Key etc: https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/User:Fontaine
> --
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] EFF: National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[hwamyeon]

Does this only impact letters going forward? Or does it apply to past
letters as well? It would be interesting to finally get some data on
their past use and potential abuses.

On 03/15/13 20:30, Katitza Rodriguez wrote:
>
>
> Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release
>
> For Immediate Release: Friday, March 15, 2013
>
> Contact:
>
> Matt Zimmerman
>   Senior Staff Attorney
>   Electronic Frontier Foundation
>   ma...@eff.org
>   +1 415 436-9333 x127
>
> Cindy Cohn
>   Legal Director
>   Electronic Frontier Foundation
>   ci...@eff.org
>   +1 415 436-9333 x108 (office), +1 415 307-2148 (cell)
>
> Kurt Opsahl
>   Senior Staff Attorney
>   Electronic Frontier Foundation
>   k...@eff.org
>   +1 415 436-9333 x106
>
> National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal
> Judge Rules
>
> Court Finds NSL Statutes Violate First Amendment and
> Separation of Powers
>
> San Francisco - A federal district court judge in San
> Francisco has ruled that National Security Letter (NSL)
> provisions in federal law violate the Constitution.  The
> decision came in a lawsuit challenging a NSL on behalf of
> an unnamed telecommunications company represented by the
> Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
>
> In the ruling publicly released today, Judge Susan Illston
> ordered that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) stop
> issuing NSLs and cease enforcing the gag provision in this
> or any other case.  The landmark ruling is stayed for 90
> days to allow the government to appeal.
>
> "We are very pleased that the court recognized the fatal
> constitutional shortcomings of the NSL statute," said EFF
> Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman.  "The government's
> gags have truncated the public debate on these
> controversial surveillance tools.  Our client looks forward
> to the day when it can publicly discuss its experience."
>
> The controversial NSL provisions EFF challenged on behalf
> of the unnamed client allow the FBI to issue administrative
> letters -- on its own authority and without court approval
> -- to telecommunications companies demanding information
> about their customers.  The controversial provisions also
> permit the FBI to permanently gag service providers from
> revealing anything about the NSLs, including the fact that
> a demand was made, which prevents providers from notifying
> either their customers or the public.  The limited judicial
> review provisions essentially write the courts out of the
> process.
>
> In today's ruling, the court held that the gag order
> provisions of the statute violate the First Amendment and
> that the review procedures violate separation of powers.
> Because those provisions were not separable from the rest
> of the statute, the court declared the entire statute
> unconstitutional.  In addressing the concerns of the
> service provider, the court noted: "Petitioner was adamant
> about its desire to speak publicly about the fact that it
> received the NSL at issue to further inform the ongoing
> public debate."
>
> "The First Amendment prevents the government from silencing
> people and stopping them from criticizing its use of
> executive surveillance power," said EFF Legal Director
> Cindy Cohn.  "The NSL statute has long been a concern of
> many Americans, and this small step should help restore
> balance between liberty and security."
>
> EFF first brought this challenge on behalf of its client in
> May of 2011.
>
> For the full order:
> https://www.eff.org/document/nsl-ruling-march-14-2013
>
> For more on this case:
> https://www.eff.org/cases/re-matter-2011-national-security-letter
>
> For this release:
> https://www.eff.org/press/releases/national-security-letters-are-unconstitutional-federal-judge-rules
>
>
> About EFF
>
> The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading
> organization protecting civil liberties in the digital
> world. Founded in 1990, we defend free speech online, fight
> illegal surveillance, promote the rights of digital
> innovators, and work to ensure that the rights and freedoms
> we enjoy are enhanced, rather than eroded, as our use of
> technology grows. EFF is a member-supported organization.
> Find out more athttps://www.eff.org.
>
>
> -end-
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings
> at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] EFF: National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[Nicholas Merrill]

On 3/16/13 6:03 PM, hwamyeon wrote:
> Does this only impact letters going forward? Or does it apply to past
> letters as well? It would be interesting to finally get some data on
> their past use and potential abuses.
>
Some advice I have gotten suggests that it is not retroactive.. i.e. it
only applies going forward.

And of course on top of that, the judge's decision is stayed pending appeal.

Not everyone on this list may remember back to the Doe v. Ashcroft / Doe
v. Mukasey / Doe v. Gonzalez / Doe v. Holder case that I was the
plaintiff in but we got a similar decision in New York's southern
district from Judge Marrero two times - in 2004 and 2007 -  that the NSL
provision is unconstitutional, and violates the 1st, 4th and 5th
amendments to the constitution.

Until you can get the decision upheld by the Supreme court, and the
government continues to appeal, it doesn't "stick", so to speak.

I'd be happy to talk about it, provided I can get completely out of the
gag order, which I have not given up on.

More news as it becomes available.

best,

Nick


-- 
Nicholas Merrill
Executive Director
The Calyx Institute
287 Spring Street
New York, NY 10013
Voice: 212-966-1900 x801
Mobile: 917-770-2491

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] EFF: National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[Nicholas Merrill]

On 3/16/13 6:03 PM, hwamyeon wrote:
> Does this only impact letters going forward? Or does it apply to past
> letters as well? It would be interesting to finally get some data on
> their past use and potential abuses.
>
>
Some advice I have gotten suggests that it is not retroactive.. i.e. it
only applies going forward.

And of course on top of that, the judge's decision is stayed pending appeal.

Not everyone on this list may remember back to the Doe v. Ashcroft / Doe
v. Mukasey / Doe v. Gonzalez / Doe v. Holder case that I was the
plaintiff in but we got a similar decision in New York's southern
district from Judge Marrero two times - in 2004 and 2007 -  that the NSL
provision is unconstitutional, and violates the 1st, 4th and 5th
amendments to the constitution.

Until you can get the decision upheld by the Supreme court, and the
government continues to appeal, it doesn't "stick", so to speak.

I'd be happy to talk about it, provided I can get completely out of the
gag order, which I have not given up on.

More news as it becomes available.

best,

Nick


-- 
Nicholas Merrill
Executive Director
The Calyx Institute
287 Spring Street
New York, NY 10013
Voice: 212-966-1900 x801
Mobile: 917-770-2491

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

Re: [liberationtech] EFF: National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal Judge Rules

[R. Jason Cronk]

Assuming this order survives appeal or the government fails to appeal, 
the order would only apply to the plaintiff in the case. Further, any 
NSLs issued in this jurisdiction, the Northern District of California, 
would be presumptively unconstitutional, though a recipient would be 
advised to seek a court order saying as much. However, if the Supreme 
Court ruled it facially unconstitutional (as did the judge in this 
case), that would apply to all NSLs, past and future.


Jason



On 3/16/2013 6:03 PM, hwamyeon wrote:

Does this only impact letters going forward? Or does it apply to past
letters as well? It would be interesting to finally get some data on
their past use and potential abuses.

On 03/15/13 20:30, Katitza Rodriguez wrote:


Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release

For Immediate Release: Friday, March 15, 2013

Contact:

Matt Zimmerman
   Senior Staff Attorney
   Electronic Frontier Foundation
   ma...@eff.org
   +1 415 436-9333 x127

Cindy Cohn
   Legal Director
   Electronic Frontier Foundation
   ci...@eff.org
   +1 415 436-9333 x108 (office), +1 415 307-2148 (cell)

Kurt Opsahl
   Senior Staff Attorney
   Electronic Frontier Foundation
   k...@eff.org
   +1 415 436-9333 x106

National Security Letters Are Unconstitutional, Federal
Judge Rules

Court Finds NSL Statutes Violate First Amendment and
Separation of Powers

San Francisco - A federal district court judge in San
Francisco has ruled that National Security Letter (NSL)
provisions in federal law violate the Constitution.  The
decision came in a lawsuit challenging a NSL on behalf of
an unnamed telecommunications company represented by the
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

In the ruling publicly released today, Judge Susan Illston
ordered that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) stop
issuing NSLs and cease enforcing the gag provision in this
or any other case.  The landmark ruling is stayed for 90
days to allow the government to appeal.

"We are very pleased that the court recognized the fatal
constitutional shortcomings of the NSL statute," said EFF
Senior Staff Attorney Matt Zimmerman.  "The government's
gags have truncated the public debate on these
controversial surveillance tools.  Our client looks forward
to the day when it can publicly discuss its experience."

The controversial NSL provisions EFF challenged on behalf
of the unnamed client allow the FBI to issue administrative
letters -- on its own authority and without court approval
-- to telecommunications companies demanding information
about their customers.  The controversial provisions also
permit the FBI to permanently gag service providers from
revealing anything about the NSLs, including the fact that
a demand was made, which prevents providers from notifying
either their customers or the public.  The limited judicial
review provisions essentially write the courts out of the
process.

In today's ruling, the court held that the gag order
provisions of the statute violate the First Amendment and
that the review procedures violate separation of powers.
Because those provisions were not separable from the rest
of the statute, the court declared the entire statute
unconstitutional.  In addressing the concerns of the
service provider, the court noted: "Petitioner was adamant
about its desire to speak publicly about the fact that it
received the NSL at issue to further inform the ongoing
public debate."

"The First Amendment prevents the government from silencing
people and stopping them from criticizing its use of
executive surveillance power," said EFF Legal Director
Cindy Cohn.  "The NSL statute has long been a concern of
many Americans, and this small step should help restore
balance between liberty and security."

EFF first brought this challenge on behalf of its client in
May of 2011.

For the full order:
https://www.eff.org/document/nsl-ruling-march-14-2013

For more on this case:
https://www.eff.org/cases/re-matter-2011-national-security-letter

For this release:
https://www.eff.org/press/releases/national-security-letters-are-unconstitutional-federal-judge-rules


About EFF

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading
organization protecting civil liberties in the digital
world. Founded in 1990, we defend free speech online, fight
illegal surveillance, promote the rights of digital
innovators, and work to ensure that the rights and freedoms
we enjoy are enhanced, rather than eroded, as our use of
technology grows. EFF is a member-supported organization.
Find out more athttps://www.eff.org.


 -end-





--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by
emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings
at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing 
moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech




*R. Jason Cronk, Esq.,