The Steel Magnolia wrote:Occupied Deutschland wrote:So one has no expectation of privacy when it comes to who they're talking to?
Besides that, who one calls can easily reveal the content of the call. If one calls (or is called by) their gynocologist and then calls planned parenthood the content of what is said is hardly needed.
It opens up so many potentials for abuse it isn't even funny, and from the sound of things the FISA court can't be trusted in the slightest to provide anything but the most cursory of watches over the program.
Again, if I recall correctly, the fact that those calls and emails have occurred is not protected by the fourth amendment. You can argue that it should be, but that's not the case currently.
Once more, with the infantile "SCOTUS hasn't ruled!" horseshit.
Ratz vs. United States established the precedent that, at the very least, the content of telecommunications are protected by the Fourth Amendment.
In the absence of further SCOTUS ruling, the NSA is acting illegally when it intercepts internet messages without a warrant and and copies the contents of them onto it's servers. That constitutes a wiretap of a United States citizen, many of whom are not talking to foreign nationals, but simply using their telecommunications service to talk to colleagues, friends, or family. When the NSA conducts dragnet surveillance, even if it's to target people talking to foreign POI's, they are wiretapping millions of Americans in the process.
In my view, it's illegal, but once again, you will pull out "SCOTUS hasn't ruled on that!", and thus worm away from actually confronting the arguments I'm putting forward.






