If this isn’t a @#$@#$ anti-Constitution ruling, I don’t know what is. Federal judge William Pauley upheld the feds seizing all Americans phone records. Why? ““This blunt tool only works because it collects everything,” Pauley decreed. This dude should be a White House spokesman, not a federal judge. At least his decision, by creating a split among the federal circuits, boosts the chances of the Supreme Court taking the case. But the Supremes utterly disgraced themselves on the surveillance issue earlier this year so I am not holding my breath….
The New York Times article on this ruling against the ACLU is here.
Hmmm. What does the NSA have on THIS guy? (The same kinds of things that they have on each member of the Supreme Court who will uphold this ruling, etc. etc.) Welcome to Soviet Amerika.
Scott, some people are simply born servile. NSA might not need anything on this dude for him to burnish their boots until they shine brighter than [insert off-color metaphor here]
More importantly, remember that federal judges are appointed by the federal government. The funny bit isn’t that they rule in favor of strong government, it’s that they ever rule against their employer at all.
The selection process is *not* one that’s likely to put many libertarians* behind the bench….
*anarchist or minarchist
True – but do they have to be such brazen bootlickers?
And nominated by Bill Clinton.
Let us not be dainty with our Civil Liberties, let us use blunt tools on them. The lack of discernment on this issue is staggering. A craven people will not long exist against even minor opponents, worst of all, themselves.