A federal court ruling has determined that warrantless searches of databases containing communications collected under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) actually do require a warrant when targeting U.S. residents. The case, involving U.S. resident Agron Hasbajrami, highlights the controversy surrounding FISA Section 702, which allows the government to collect communications without probable cause.
One of the government’s most controversial warrantless spying practices does, in fact, require a warrant, according to a new federal court ruling., issued Tuesday night by the eastern district of New York Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall, comes in the case of Agron Hasbajrami, a U.S. resident who was arrested in 2011 and initially pleaded guilty to attempting to provide material support to a terrorist organization.
“To hold otherwise would effectively allow law enforcement to amass a repository of communications under Section 702—including those of U.S. persons—that can later be searched on demand without limitation.” DeArcy Hall wrote. Civil liberties advocates hailed the ruling as a victory and called on Congress to reform FISA to make it explicitly clear that searches of collected communications require a warrant.
FISA Warrantless Spying Surveillance Privacy Fourth Amendment
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Federal Appeals Court Strikes Down Net Neutrality RulesA federal appeals court in Cincinnati ruled that the FCC lacked the authority to reinstate net neutrality regulations, ending a nearly two-decade effort to regulate broadband internet providers. The court's decision, based on a recent Supreme Court ruling, overturns the Biden administration's tech policy and allows broadband providers to potentially slow or block access to internet content.
Read more »
Federal Court Blocks FCC from Reinstatement of Net Neutrality RulesA federal appeals court has struck down the FCC's attempt to reinstate net neutrality rules, citing a Supreme Court decision limiting federal agencies' rule-making power.
Read more »
Federal Appeals Court Rules DACA Unlawful, Raising Concerns for 'Dreamers'A federal appeals court has declared the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) immigration policy unlawful, casting a shadow of uncertainty over the future of hundreds of thousands of 'Dreamers' brought to the U.S. as children. The ruling, while partially stayed, could ultimately lead to the Supreme Court deciding the fate of this long-debated program. The Biden administration's efforts to codify DACA were deemed to violate U.S. immigration law, with the court focusing its impact on Texas, the state leading the legal challenge against DACA. The ruling's implications for current DACA beneficiaries remain unclear, pending further court decisions.
Read more »
Federal Appeals Court Rules Against DACAA federal appeals court has ruled against the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, an Obama-era policy that shielded immigrants who arrived in the US illegally as children. The decision, which marks the latest setback for DACA, prohibits the federal government from accepting new applications while current beneficiaries can renew their permits. While the ruling does not immediately change the status of DACA recipients, it raises concerns about the program's future and its vulnerability to further legal challenges.
Read more »
Federal Appeals Court Rules Against DACAA federal appeals court has ruled against DACA, an Obama-era policy that protects immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children. The decision, while not immediately changing the status of current beneficiaries, blocks new applications and raises concerns about the program's future. The ruling could lead to a third Supreme Court case on DACA.
Read more »
Federal Appeals Court Rules Against DACAIn a significant setback for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, a federal appeals court ruled against the Obama-era policy that shields young immigrants brought to the US illegally as children. While the ruling doesn't immediately impact the over 500,000 beneficiaries who can renew their permits, it blocks new applications, raising concerns about the program's future.
Read more »