Courtesy of Pam Martens.
The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund Is Sponsoring "Thank You Edward Snowden!" Ads on Buses in Washington, D.C.
On Monday, Judge Richard Leon raised a hornet’s nest of questions about the constitutionality of the government’s Orwellian spy tactics against citizens about whom it hasn’t the slightest suspicion of wrongdoing in his decision in Klayman v. Obama.
Judge Leon came down on the side of Larry Klayman and Charles Strange, two of the plaintiffs suing the government over its massive collection of tens of millions of phone records of law abiding citizens, which it has given itself the right to probe and analyze for a period of five years. The lawsuit grew out of the revelations made by National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower, Edward Snowden.
The Judge found the program to be in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, writing that he could not “imagine a more ‘indiscriminate’ and ‘arbitrary invasion’ than this systemic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on every single citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without prior judicial approval.”
The Fourth Amendment requires “probable cause” prior to a search as opposed to a vast dragnet that sets the government up as a surveillance state with impunity to potentially target political activists seeking a realignment of their democracy. The Fourth Amendment reads as follows:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
…
