Take that!

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 Hattem05/07/15 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

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?

Morning Twitter Update, 5.6.15: Chris Cuomo is getting the fighting words doctrine and First Amendment hilariously wrong.

Chris Cuomo phonically learned the dit-dit of law but has no basic understanding of law and rights. That’s why all the dumb.

Cuomo replied:

@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?

I love how Cuomo screams READ THE CONSTITUTION then cites case law (incorrectly).

Also, of course, @ChrisCuomo completely overlooks the face-to-face requirement as he alleges that fighting words doctrine somehow applies.

As a followup to Cuomo’s use of, “Chaplinski,” it has largely been reversed. You can follow the link above to see how limited it was. The limitation with ‘Chaplinski’ is that it requires a face-to-face confrontation. None of those requirements are met contrary to Cuomo’s assertions.
Not even über-liberal Salon can stomach Cuomo’s idiotcy.

The Good and the Bad (Updated: 6-25-14 @ 3:00pm)

I like to start out with the good. The Supremes released some decisions this morning, The Supreme Court banned warrantless cell phone searches. It was a win for 4th Amendment and privacy advocates.

The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that police cannot go snooping through people’s cell phones without a warrant, in a unanimous decision that amounts to a major statement in favor of privacy rights.

Police agencies had argued that searching through the data on cell phones was no different than asking someone to turn out his pockets, but the justices rejected that, saying a cell phone is more fundamental. — The Washington Times.

The decision was unanimous. That alone is striking. The article says the decision is a clear 21st century update of privacy rights. In answer to LEO questions about searching cellphones, Chief Justice Roberts response was simple, “Get a warrant.” This decision now places cellphones—and the information contained within, in the same category as a person’s home.

“The fact that technology now allows an individual to carry such information in his hand does not make the information any less worthy of the protection for which the Founders fought,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the unanimous court.

“Our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple— get a warrant.”

Justices even said police cannot check a cellphone’s call log, saying even those contain more information that just phone numbers, and so perusing them is a violation of privacy that can only be justified with a warrant.

The chief justice said cellphones are different not only because people can carry around so much more data — the equivalent of millions of pages of documents — that police would have access to, but that the data itself is qualitatively different than what someone might otherwise carry.

He said it could lay bare someone’s entire personal history, from their medical records to their “specific movements down to the minute.” — The Washington Times.

There is another similar case winding its way to the Supreme Court. In this case, the device is a laptop instead of a cell phone. A similar case that upheld a ‘legal exception,” known as ‘the border search,’ placed restrictions on searching personal tablets and laptops within 100 miles of the US border.

The decision released today is a win for all of us, regardless.

***

On the other hand, the bad occurred yesterday in Mississippi. Thad Cochran won the run-off election for the GOP Senatorial candidacy. He did so by asking democrats to illegally cross party lines to vote for him. An estimated 35,000 did so.

Congratulations To The GOP Establishment On Their Pyrrhic Victory In Mississippi Yesterday

Written By : John Hawkins, June 25, 2014

Last night, Thad Cochran beat Chris McDaniel in a primary run-off and became the GOP’s Senate candidate in Mississippi.

It wasn’t an honorable victory.

Cochran won by getting Democrats to vote in a Republican primary. This was done by touting his support of food stamps. It was done by paying “walking around money” to buy votes. It was done by smearing Tea Partiers as racists.

That’s what it took to re-elect a senile 76 year old man that few people even believe is mentally capable of serving out another term in the Senate.

The cost of that victory was the integrity, personal honor and reputations of prominent Cochran supporters like Haley Barbour, Karl Rove, Mitch McConnell, John McCain and the NRSC, who were all undoubtedly congratulating each other on their sleazy victory last night, while today they’ll begin to try to distance themselves from the dishonorable conduct they winked at during the campaign. We may never know which of them was ultimately responsible for smearing Tea Partiers as racists or centering the run-off campaign around getting Democrats to vote in a GOP campaign. But what we do know is that if Haley Barbour, Karl Rove, John McCain or the NRSC found it unacceptable, they could have put their foot down and demanded the campaign put a stop to it. None of them did because they were just fine with using those sort of tactics to defeat grassroots conservatives.

In return, they will probably get their doddering moderate senator elected instead of adding another grassroots conservative in D.C. But, the cost will be millions of turned-off conservatives, fund raising hits for the already failing NRSC, and even more animosity and venom between Tea Partiers and the establishment.

What was it King Pyrrhus said after his “victory” over the Romans that cost him many of his best officers and troops?

“One more such victory and we are lost.”

How many more “victories” like the one Thad Cochran won yesterday can the GOP stand without shattering to pieces?

I call myself a conservative. At the moment, my allegiance is to the GOP…at the moment.

The Cochran-McDaniel primary isn’t over yet. McDaniel has not conceded.

MCDANIEL MAY CONTEST RESULTS
After Cochran sealed the GOP nomination Tuesday night, McDaniel spoke to supporters, but did not concede. Instead he spoke of “dozens of irregularities” in Tuesday’s voting. Supporters told Fox News today that McDaniel’s team was up all night looking into whether his campaign should challenge last night’s results. McDaniel backers accuse Cochran of pandering to black Democrats, an incendiary charge in the state with a freighted recent history on race relations. But Cochran’s outreach to black voters is nothing new. In a piece from 1984, NYT reports, “Mr. Cochran assiduously courted the black vote, flooding black radio stations with advertisements featuring ‘The Harrises, Mississippi’s Favorite Family,’ a fictional black family. To the strains of soap opera music, they debated the campaign and concluded that ‘Thad’s all right’ and ‘the other side is lying about him.’”
 
“There is nothing strange at all about standing as people of faith for our country that we built, that we believe in. But there is something a bit strange, there is something a bit unusual about a Republican primary that is decided by liberal democrats.” –Challenger Chris McDaniel’s election night speech. — FOX News First, By Chris Stirewalt, June 25, 2014.

 

Update: McDaniel will contest the election.

More and more conservatives, Shawn Hannity among them, are calling for a third party. I’m not in that party controlled socialism to corporate socialism, I’ll have to look for an alternative. At times like this, that decision point seems to be getting closer every day.

 

Disturbing News Items

According to the 9th Circus in California, the government has the right to bug your car and track your movements via a GPS tracker. In the initial appeal to the three Judge panel, two of the three judges upheld the government’s right.  The larger court refused to review the ruling.

Does this bother you?  It does bother me.  It is a clear invasion of privacy.  A basic right, one not enumerated in the Constitution, is the right to travel freely and without interference.  When the government tracks you, they have placed constraints on where you can travel.  If you go somewhere they don’t want, they can track you down and arrest you.  

Some would say the government already has that right.  After all, the government restricts access to Area 51 in Nevada. The difference there is that Area 51 is government property and violating that perimeter is trespassing.  The government cannot, however, prevent you traveling on the public roads next to Area 51. The dissenting judges in the 9th circuit believe this is just another violation of personal privacy.

It is a dangerous decision – one that, as the dissenting judges warned, could turn America into the sort of totalitarian state imagined by George Orwell. It is particularly offensive because the judges added insult to injury with some shocking class bias: the little personal privacy that still exists, the court suggested, should belong mainly to the rich. — Yahoo News.

I had an email exchange yesterday discussing mobile phones.  In that discussion, the other party said he wanted a GPS app.  His son travels the boonies and wanted a Garmin-like GPS capability.  I said that while my current phone has a GPS module, I have it turned off (except when calling 911).  I don’t want to publicize my movement, where I’ve gone, nor whom I see.  It isn’t anyone’s business except perhaps my wife and if she asks I’ll tell her.  

I once owned a GMC Yukon that had On-Star installed at the factory.  I took the Yukon to a local mechanic and had it disconnected. (By the way, did you know the cops can ease-drop on you via On-Star and track your movements?  With a warrant of course, but it seems that it’s easier and easier for cops to get such warrants.) 

Perhaps I’m a bit paranoid, but I prefer to preserve my privacy against anyone most specifically governments.