Well…it’s a start. What am I talking about? A US Appeals Court is limited the Patriot Act. Specifically, limiting the NSA authority to collect telephone data without a warrant. No more mass collection.
Top federal court rules against NSA’s phone records program
By Julian Hattem – 05/07/15 09:25 AM EDT
A federal court has decided that the National Security Agency’s (NSA) bulk, warrantless collection of millions of Americans’ phone records is illegal.
The sweeping decision from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday represents a major court victory for opponents of the NSA, and comes just as Congress begins a fight over whether to renew the underlying law used to justify the program.
That program “exceeds the scope of what Congress has authorized,” Judge Gerard Lynch wrote on behalf of the three-judge panel.
The law “cannot be interpreted in a way that defies any meaningful limit,” he added.
The key section of the Patriot Act that ‘allows’ the government to collection information has been interpreted too broadly according to the bill’s author, Rep, Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.). It is §215 that is flawed and the section that the 2nd Appellate Court is limiting.
But, the win in court may be moot. Despite efforts by the White House, the NSA and statists in Congress, §215 is due to expire within a month.
***
Chris Cuomo, son of the late New York Governor Mario Cuomo, displayed his stupidity on Twitter. His liberal buddies piled on. Not to defend him, but to ridicule him. It couldn’t happen to a better, ‘stuck on stupid’ liberal.
CNN’s Chris Cuomo gets Twitter-spanked after boneheaded First Amendment gaffe
His claim that the “fighting words” exception applies to hate speech made for “fighting words” on Twitter
, Wednesday, May 6, 2015 10:49 AM CDT
It is increasingly difficult for those who identify on the left and right to find anything they agree upon, but this morning CNN anchor and law school graduate Chris Cuomo provided those across the political spectrum with some common ground.
Cuomo was hosting a Twitter conversation about the constitutionality of hate speech and wrote:
First Amendment experts, self-styled and actual and of all political stripes, jumped in to inform him of his wrongness:
Such a painfully dumb tweet! @ChrisCuomo: can you point to where this free speech “exception” is in US Constitution? https://twitter.com/ChrisCuomo/status/595934009764487168 …
Ass. You are a disgrace to Fordham Law School, which only admitted you because of your famous father. https://twitter.com/ChrisCuomo/status/595934009764487168 …
it doesn’t. hate speech is excluded from protection. dont just say you love the constitution…read it https://twitter.com/TweetBrettMac/status/595931074477305856 …
@ChrisCuomo hey, long time listener first time caller, looking for this in this constitution you speak of. Got a link?
it doesn’t. hate speech is excluded from protection. dont just say you love the constitution…read it https://twitter.com/TweetBrettMac/status/595931074477305856 …
@ChrisCuomo I did read the First Amendment, and still can’t find the “hate speech” exception to free speech. Can you point it out for us?
@EdMorrissey I will keep saying one word: chaplinsky
That word, “chaplinsky,” refers to Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, in which the Supreme Court decided that some speech — like “fighting words,” or other statements that incite violence — aren’t protected by the First Amendment. Unfortunately for Cuomo:
FYI, the case @ChrisCuomo keeps citing (a) has been subsequently so gutted it’s basically a dead letter & (b) IS NOT ABOUT HATE SPEECH.
And you will still be entirely wrong. ReTweet: @ChrisCuomo @EdMorrissey I will keep saying one word: chaplinsky
@EdMorrissey So, basically, @ChrisCuomo‘s expert fact-based legal opinion is a single word chanted repeatedly like a talisman against evil?
Also, of course, @ChrisCuomo completely overlooks the face-to-face requirement as he alleges that fighting words doctrine somehow applies.