Reasons why: 1) Rosemary Collyer ruled on complex change & abundant abuses w/o full understanding of what she was ruling on.
-
-
-
2) In spite of complexity of issue (and persistence of problems) she didn't appoint amicus. Didn't--as required by law--explain why not.
-
3) She didn't define key terms. 4) Even tho Congress is asking for real
#s, she didn't bother to get any for herself. -
5) Even tho it is abundantly clear NSA doesn't yet have knowledge to fulfill promises they made to her, she approved certs based on promises
-
6) Curiously, we didn't get to see docs with those promises on them, signed by (for first time) Coats and Sessions, as well as Rogers.
-
7) Unlike Reggie Walton, John Bates, Thomas Hogan, Collyer let NSA keep data collected breaking rules, & data collected based off that data.
-
In other words, as permissive as you think FISC has been in the past, this ruling sets new diminished standards for rubber stamp court.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
-
Thanks much.
End of conversation
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.