If interested reading in my statement for the record at SJC's 702 hearing, mentioned by @SenatorLeahy, it's here: http://bit.ly/27aVAZO
-
-
didn't Hogan ignore advocate, and there is no appeal?
-
More concerned Hogan didn't deal with things Jeffress appears to have raised.
@MiekeEoyang@Tx_knight_flyer -
but is it perhaps instructive to compare, what if a Judge ignored one party in Article III court?
-
Need to move on, but eg standard actually HIGHER for location data in FISC than most TIII courts
@MiekeEoyang@Tx_knight_flyer -
Thanks for the info. Will report back later.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
But thus far better than what existed.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I still don't see how Olsen and Brand can reasonably argue it isn't rubberstamp.
-
My defense of FISC: https://www.emptywheel.net/2015/11/04/the-fisa-courts-uncelebrated-good-points/ … It's largely judge dependent, I think Collyer will be bad
@MiekeEoyang@Tx_knight_flyer -
FISC is non-optimal for enforcement when rights protection is dependent on which Judge
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
democracy, free society doesn't have secret laws and secret courts without a adversarial process
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
rulings are secret, advocate can't appeal.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.