Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Copyright Law Blogs -> IPTAblog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Copyright Law
: IPTAblog[Headline Redacted]
By Andrew Raff, Esq.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Appeals released a redacted version of its ruling from August 2008 upholding the constitutionality of a statute authorizing an intelligence program to wiretap international phone calls and intercept e-mail messages without a specific court order.
In re: Directives [redacted text]* Pursuant to Section 105B of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (No. 08-01)
The court holds that "a foreign intelligence exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement exists when surveillance is conducted to obtain foreign intelligence for national security purposes and is directed against foreign powers or agents of foreign powers reasonably believed to be located outside the United States."
The New York Times, Intelligence Court Rules Wiretapping Power Legal, "The decision marks the first time since the disclosure of the National Security Agency’s warrantless eavesdropping program three years ago that an appellate court has addressed the constitutionality of the federal government’s wiretapping powers. In validating the government’s wide authority to collect foreign intelligence, it may offer legal credence to the Bush administration’s repeated assertions that the president has the power to act without specific court approval in ordering national security eavesdropping that may involve Americans."
Full post as published by IPTAblog on January 15, 2009 (boomark / email).

Most Mind-Numbingly Obvious Headline of the Week
Improper Redaction Makes Sensitive Information Easily Accessible via PACER
"California Sex Offender Put in Charge of Kids at Marijuana Festival"
Another lesson in hyphenating phrasal adjectives
headline writers has grammar problem







