The objections are to non-disclosure, not to NSLs per se. RT @FranTownsend: Judge Strikes Down Surveillance Law http://on.wsj.com/Zw07BJ
-
-
Replying to @Fantom_Planet
@Fantom_Planet@frantownsend InRe NSLs: #1 They are essentially a form of admin subpoena. #2 1st used primarily in FCI cases1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Fantom_Planet
@Fantom_Planet@frantownsend Federal Grand Jury subpoenas have secrecy provisions as well. Nobody objects to them. Why?4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AllThingsNatSec
@AllThingsHLS Because 1) an outsider reviews the probable cause 2) they'll be reviewed again in any trial.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel An outsider reviews the PC? Clearly you have never obtained a FGJ subpoena. Hah.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Replying to @AllThingsNatSec
@AllThingsHLS NSL law isn't written to allow that at all.
8:27 AM - 16 Mar 2013
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.