@emptywheel @benjaminwittes By which you mean he lost his court case?
-
-
-
@BradMossEsq Hmm. Incorrect on those facts too. Nope. Govt found to have illegally surveilled.@benjaminwittes -
@emptywheel "law does not [] entitle those targeted by surveillance to damages from the government, even if [] surveillance was illegal." -
@BradMossEsq@emptywheel Dumb question, but would FTCA apply here? SCOTUS in Millbrook for ex. applied to it acts/omissions of LE officers -
@jackgillum@emptywheel Even if it did the officials in question would more than likely be protected by way of qualified immunity. -
@BradMossEsq Yes. Thanks for making my point abt Wittes for me.@jackgillum -
@emptywheel@jackgillum Respectfully Marcy, you tend to use loaded terms when discussing legal nuances. -
@BradMossEsq Which was loaded? "Cute"?@jackgillum - 4 more replies
New conversation -
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.