digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at en.wikipedia.org

History of Attacks on the 4th Amendment before FISA

en.wikipedia.org — Olmstead v. the United States, ( 1928 ) overturned by Katz v. United States ( 1967 ). The fight we Americans undertake to win and protect our civil rights against tyranny transcends generations. You don't have to look too far into this to find some of the most compelling speeches in the English language.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • yellowcakewalk, on 07/15/2008, -3/+58Much more at
    http://fourthamendment.com/
    http://fourthamendmentfortheinternet.blogspot.com

    All Americans need to study up, get up, stand up, and take back the Bill of Rights.
    Take it back from the small little men that purloined it and scurried down the ally like rats.

    A lazy citizenship is a fertile garden for tyranny.
    A robust citizenship would never allow this to happen.

    Get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights.
    Get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight.
    • JeremyGrieves, on 07/16/2008, -1/+8The great silent majority doesnt concern itself with anything that isnt fed to them by their tv's.
    • madwaxer, on 07/16/2008, -0/+4A quick solution would be to learn how to use the 5th correctly.
      http://www.commonlawvenue.com/People/RMcLeod/05-00 ...
    • use2bacanadian, on 07/16/2008, -6/+0Letting lyrics of a popular song does not inspire confidence in me regarding your critical thinking skills. Did anyone tell you that FISA expires in in 2010?
      • kingmanic, on 07/16/2008, -0/+7"Letting lyrics of a popular song does not inspire confidence in me regarding your critical thinking skills. Did anyone tell you that FISA expires in in 2010?"

        Bad grammar does not inspire confidence in me regarding your critical thinking skills.
    • PopcornDave, on 07/16/2008, -0/+6The fight's almost over and we're losing badly. The generation growing up has no idea what freedoms are or what's been lost. Do schools even teach civics anymore or are they more worried about shuffling the drones along?

      Unless the White House and Congress, while in session, were mysteriously whisked away in a gigantic tornado, nothing is going to change. Both parties are more interested in playing puppet master to the masses than actually serving the populace that elected them.

      Maybe a constitution game for the XBox, PS3, Nintendo DS and any other platform I've forgotten might educate the kids today, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for somebody to write the game.

      That doesn't mean that I think we should give up by any stretch. But it's a damn tough road to hoe when you're up against things like Entertainment Tonight and I Survived a Japanese Game Show.
  • LoneRanger85, on 07/15/2008, -28/+7Liberals. They get older, but they don't get any smarter.
    • yellowcakewalk, on 07/15/2008, -5/+18Thank you Tonto. I'll write that down.
    • qdkk, on 07/15/2008, -8/+12@ LoneRanger85
      It's because of liberals that you even have the ability to make inane comments like yours.
      • phorden, on 07/15/2008, -11/+5Not really. Liberals want you to have freedom of speech as long as you agree with what they think.
      • starmanfalls, on 07/16/2008, -9/+4That statement is full on *****. Liberals suck. They know it too. They just don't think we see them in their true light.
      • qdkk, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1@ phorden
        Sure sounds like you want everyone to agree with you.

        @starmanfalls
        How old are you? Ten?
    • CryRightardCry, on 07/15/2008, -5/+9Oh ranger, you pathetic cowardly loser.
      It's a shame how you ***** all over a beloved childhood hero of mine.
      I'm assuming you took that nick as a satirical name, since the Lone Ranger stood up for honesty and truth and you stand for shilling for the Bush failures.

      And like the typical ***** rightard he is he fails to address the POINT of the article.
      GASP!
      A rightard avoiding the point? HOW SHOCKING!
      Gee, you mean it's yet another attempt to sidetrack a REAL issue with this moronic "liberals get older..." crap.

      LR85, you prove that comment applies to you right wing shills. After all this time and all the evidence, you ***** STILL dance for nickles for the GOP/Bush/right wing/PNAC.
      If that's not dumb beyond belief I can't imagine what is.
      Really, how can you PRETEND to be smart when you continue to swallow whole any stupid thing tossed out there by the Bush regime?
      You have been a cheerleader for failure for years, and you STILL haven't figured it out.
      What a *****.
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 07/16/2008, -0/+2The terms Liberal and Conservative have been misused to the point where their meaning is lost. And the term 'liberal" comes from the word Liberty. The founding principle of the U.S. And roughly 60% of Americans are fairly moderate, as I am.
  • cruzecon, on 07/15/2008, -9/+21Right On! Yellowcake! Too bad our masked man misspoke, Sure, they don't get any smarter than Liberals!
    William F. Buckley was a thoughtful Conservative spokesman but, even he was having trouble identifying any survivors after 2000.
    It took Progressives and LIBERAL ideas to get this country out of the LAST Depression that Wall Street manipulators got us into. So, maybe this time our collective memory will kick in before we have another World War - oh wait, how many countries does it take to make that official?
    • Logrusmage, on 07/16/2008, -5/+2You sir are a moron. The Great Depression occurred because people bought a lot of stuff with money they didn't have (credit). It had nothing to do with some fat cat conspiracy. However, the fed did worsen the problem Gte it, the GOVERNMENT made it worse.

      It was ended when the US mobilized for war, giving a lot of unemployed jobs (as soldiers) and creating a great demand for food. The New Deal may have relieved some of the pain, but none of its programs even made a dent in the depression. Plus, it's programs were NEVER meant to be perverted to the socialist extent that they have been stretched to in this day and age. The original programs were safety nets, now we're trying to set floors. It's ridiculous.
      • BAMAToNE, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1How you're getting Dugg down is beyond me. WWII absolutely brought us out of the Depression - not FDR's New Deal. And you're right that his social programs were never meant to be the bastion of hand outs they are today. Example: Social Security was simply another way for the federal government to increase revenue. The age at which one could retire and draw pension was at or around average life expectancy anyway. Now people are living much longer. Combine that with exponential population growth and boom - Social Security crisis.
  • miamidolfan13, on 07/15/2008, -3/+21Half the Democrats sold out on this but republicans should be pissed too. Especially Libertarian leaning GOPers.
    http://www.bluetidalwave.com/2008/07/fisa-hit-list ...
    • CryRightardCry, on 07/15/2008, -10/+5Why would republican's be pissed?
      They have supported ever Bush grab at our rights.
  • Fangsinmybeard, on 07/15/2008, -3/+27The two party system has been hijacked by suicidal mass murderers call the corporate military Fascist of industry. They want all humanity to end. They are so greedy, they would sacrifice every human being on the planet just to get the last bit of money.
  • Nahanter, on 07/15/2008, -3/+33
    WARNING: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, WITH CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL, the National Security Agency may have read this email without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse nor protection save to call for the impeachment of the current President, 69 members of the Senate and 293 members of the House of Representatives.





    4th Amendment Hit Squad from http://www.bluetidalwave.com/2008/07/fisa-hit-list ...

    On Wednesday July 9, 2008 our U.S. Constitution, specifically the 4th amendment was officially torched by the U.S. government. The Democratic leadership in control of the 110th Congress lighted the definitive match to burn up every citizen's civil liberties while a giddy unpopular President George Bush and his highly voter despised rubber stamp Republican caucus held the gas can in bravado glee.

    The world would be a better place if Bush was as an effective leader of the globe as he is at whipping the Congressional Democrats in legislative battles.

    Twenty One Senate Democrats voted to give final approval today to broadening the government’s spy powers and providing legal immunity for the phone companies that took part in the illegal Bush wiretapping program.




  • jodimcmullen, on 07/15/2008, -2/+5EXCELLENT Info - thanks!
  • redrock34, on 07/15/2008, -15/+3There's no such thing as rights, only privileges.
  • wonderchemist, on 07/16/2008, -1/+6All we need to do is publicized some fourth amendment violation that were used to talk away someone's legally owned guns and we'll get both side of the spectrum defending the fourth.
  • bigskank, on 07/16/2008, -0/+5The difference between the Katz decision (which overturned Olmstead) and any decision arising out of the current FISA bill is the makeup of the Supreme Court. The court in 1968 - when Katz was decided - was decisively more liberal. I don't mean "liberal" in a slanderous way, but rather in a way that implies progressive and more open to the ideas of a stronger federal government role in protecting the rights of citizens (such as the various civil rights measures that were upheld while Earl Warren was chief justice).

    Looking at the current crop of justices, I don't think we'd get the same result. Odds are it will be similar to the Gitmo cases, with 4 justices certainly going one way, 4 justices certainly going the other, and then Justice Kennedy being the deciding vote. My bet is that the current supreme court will find the FISA bill to be constitutional, for largely the same reasons the Olmstead court did back in 1928. Namely, that the 4th Amendment and 5th Amendment don't create a zone of privacy in something you don't have an interest in, such as your phone line (you don't own your line...the phone company does).



    • PopcornDave, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1Interesting. Who would exactly own an e-mail? I would think that it would be similar to a letter which you would own until the receiving party took possession of it at which time they would own it.
  • Suzilla, on 07/16/2008, -0/+6Interesting that Olmstead also involved the use of a relatively new technology: the telephone, which, at the time, was only in widespread use for perhaps a decade or so. Likewise, public access to the Internet became available only about 15 years ago. Perhaps it takes the learned Justices a while to understand that such technologies are just as basic a form of communications as the letters written by the Framers using paper and ink, which they explicitly sought to protect in the Fourth Amendment.
  • blackula01, on 07/16/2008, -2/+2Video from Katz v. United States 1967-
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=4yAs4C-MirQ
  • JeremyGrieves, on 07/16/2008, -3/+6Follow the money on FISA,

    http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_cont ...
    • JeremyGrieves, on 07/16/2008, -0/+8Have I been burried because Obama recieved $220,789 from the telecoms? Don't burry the truth. Politicians are not your friends.
  • shadowspawn, on 07/16/2008, -1/+9There's more to this. A while ago a magazine made a popular "bullet proof" encryption schematic using over-the-shelf electronics.

    While it is illegal to use such a thing (to this day) over the telephone, FCC regulated airwave frequencies... it makes you really wonder.

    I say ***** it, if you want to encrypt your stuff, do it. Don't share the key. Make it as tough as possible. Develop strong-arm encryption and use it vigorously. THAT still is our right.

    Hell, I've seen stenography on front-page links on digg. CNN. Drudge. You'd be surprised at what you can do in today's world. If you want it secure, do it yourself. Kinda simple, eh?
  • madwaxer, on 07/16/2008, -1/+1Better yet learn how to correctly invoke the 5th!
    http://www.commonlawvenue.com/People/RMcLeod/05-00 ...
  • tykwondingo, on 07/16/2008, -2/+2"STOP CARLOS MENCIA" ?

    (sorry... I had to, the cute girl distracted me) on with the relevant commentary!
  • ancientshoes, on 07/16/2008, -1/+2did anyone click on the link? it the court ruled that wiretapping does not violate the 4th and 5th amendments....completely to the contrary to what the link submitted is insinuating
  • aenegeling, on 07/16/2008, -1/+3Such an interesting history. Dugg.
  • purfideas, on 07/16/2008, -1/+3Everyone who cares about (4th amendment) privacy should read the Brandeis dissent in its entirety, it makes a good read:

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?c ...

    It concludes, "Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means-to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal-would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face."
  • RajDhillon, on 07/16/2008, -1/+7lol funny story, about a week ago, I was out playing basketball with my friends at like 2 in the morning. A cop rolls up and tells us that the courts are closed, despite the obvious sign right at the entrance that says open 24 hours.

    So he decides to be a dick and get everyones information, and when he asks me I tell him I choose not to give it, and he then says we all have to leave or be arrested, and I tell him "That would be a violation of my 4th amendment right, and I have 5 witness here on my side."

    Luckily for me the cop had no idea what the 4th amendment right was lol so we kept on playing. He must have felt pretty stupid when he got home and found out the 4th amendment had to do with unreasonable searches.
  • Eggzb, on 07/16/2008, -1/+1Its about time they finally got rid that *****. I think they just added that one in there anyway to make it an even 10.
  • 808ethan, on 07/16/2008, -1/+5Seriously, give up. It is way easier to just believe your country is free than to fight to make it so. The lazy portion of our population already waaaay outwieghs the responsible fraction, and they are the fasting growing population as well (never too lazy to have 7 kids). Remember, we live in a democracy so all that matters is the number of beating hearts with DNA less similar to an ape than a human.

    I applaud everyone who fights for right, but we are on an out of control train that is accellerating. We're going to crash at the same time no matter what we do, so at least enjoy that time as much as possible instead of grinding yourself in the wheels.
  • gkiltz, on 07/16/2008, -0/+4Only goes to show: if you want a constitution, you have to be well prepared to defend it!
    • yellowcakewalk, on 07/16/2008, -0/+4Spoken like a true patriot. These droolers that think rights flow from the the government to the people have got it backwards.
  • ImperialRome, on 07/16/2008, -0/+1The fourth amendment is not an absolute. There are numerous exceptions to its requirements for warrants (such as traffic stops and vehicle searches) and the stop and frisk policies in NYC. There are also exceptions in cases of espionage, investigations where the warrant requirement would compromise ongoing investigations (which still allows the eavesdropping/wiretapping to continue but delays the notification requirements) , sneak and peek searches, and cases involving agents of a foreign power.
    The fourth amendment prohibits unreasonable searches, which the courts have to review on a case by case basis.
    US v Troung, US v Duggan, and US v Butenko were all cases that defendants claimed their 4th amendment rights were violated, but the courts determined that there were exceptions to requirements for a warrant for bugging, eavesdropping , and wiretapping.
    Also, see Warshak v US for more exceptions to electronic surveillance.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.