Intellectual property law
fromBloomberglaw
2 days agoOnline Wiretap Claims to Get Fresh Eye in 1st Cir. Privacy Clash
The First Circuit will clarify the Wiretap Act's applicability to online privacy claims against healthcare and financial sectors.
The Sonoma County Sheriff's Office must comply with subpoenas issued by the county's civilian oversight board as part of a whistleblower investigation into alleged misconduct, a state appeals court ruled Thursday.
The real Führer is always a judge. Out of Führerdom flows judgeship. One who wants to separate the two from each other or puts them in opposition to each other would have the judge be either the leader of the opposition or the tool of the opposition and is trying to unhinge the state with the help of the judiciary.
Private detection and spying on people was only a cottage industry by comparison with what it is today, when everything happens, if not in the glare of publicity exactly, at least within the purview of electronic surveillance of one kind or another. Surveillance is to us what electricity was to James Thurber's aunt, that is to say leaking all over the house.
Hemani is the first time since the Supreme Court's decision in Bruen upended Second Amendment jurisprudence that the court has addressed the constitutionality of laws that prosecute individuals for owning guns solely based upon a category that the gun owner falls into. In United States v. Rahimi, which the court decided in 2024, the defendant had been deemed dangerous by a family court judge, based on allegations made by his former girlfriend.
In 1996, the Supreme Court decided Whren v. United States, which came about when plainclothes vice officers patrolling in the District of Columbia passed a truck in a "high drug" area and "their suspicions were aroused." They had a hunch that the truck was involved in a drug operation. They chose to wait until it had violated a traffic ordinance (turning without a signal) and then used that violation as an excuse to stop the truck. In the course of searching the truck, they found crack cocaine.
As you know, Section 215 authorities are not interpreted in the same way that grand jury subpoena authorities are, and we are concerned that when Justice Department officials suggest that the two authorities are 'analogous' they provide the public with a false understanding of how surveillance is interpreted in practice.
And we just got this new information overnight. The Associated Press was the first to report that ICE is changing its policy. And it is now allowing its agents to forcibly enter homes without a warrant, and I just want to be clear, based solely on a more narrow administrative warrant to arrest someone on a final order of removal. Do you think this sharp turn from ICE's policy and from normal policing tactics is a violation of the Constitution's Fourth Amendment?
While the authority is legally limited to foreign intelligence, it can sweep in Americans' texts, emails and phone calls when they communicate with overseas targets. Those incidental collections - which have sometimes been followed by unauthorized searches of Americans' communications - have been extensively documented by government oversight bodies in recent years. The findings fueled reforms adopted when Congress last renewed the authority in April 2024.
This script is based on a theory proposed by Bruce Ackerman, Sterling Professor of Law and Political Science at Yale Law School. Ackerman's idea is laid out in his 1991 book We The People: Foundations, and is discussed in the second of his Oliver Wendell Holmes Lectures of 2006. It's gained prominence since the 2024 election and the wholesale assault on our governmental system by Trump.