{"id":207621,"date":"2017-07-25T11:55:58","date_gmt":"2017-07-25T15:55:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/nsa-surveillance-american-civil-liberties-union\/"},"modified":"2017-07-25T11:55:58","modified_gmt":"2017-07-25T15:55:58","slug":"nsa-surveillance-american-civil-liberties-union","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/nsa-2\/nsa-surveillance-american-civil-liberties-union\/","title":{"rendered":"NSA Surveillance | American Civil Liberties Union"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    The National Security Agencys mass    surveillance has greatly expanded in the years since September    11, 2001. Disclosures    have shown that, until recently, the    government regularly tracked the calls of hundreds of millions    of Americans. Today, it continues to spy on a vast but unknown    number of Americans international calls, text messages,    web-browsing activities, and    emails.  <\/p>\n<p>    The governments surveillance programs    have infiltrated most of the communications technologies we    have come to rely on. They are largely enabled by a problematic    law passed by Congress  the FISA Amendments Act (FAA), which    is set to expire this year  along with Executive Order 12,333,    the primary authority invoked by the NSA to conduct    surveillance outside of the United States. The Patriot Act has    also made it easier for the government to spy on Americans    right here at home over the past 15 years. Although the Foreign    Intelligence Surveillance Court oversees some of the    governments surveillance activities, it operates in near-total    secrecy through one-sided procedures that heavily favor the    government.  <\/p>\n<p>    Our Constitution and democratic system    demand that government be transparent and accountable to the    people, not the other way around. History has shown that    powerful, secret surveillance tools will almost certainly be    abused for political ends.  <\/p>\n<p>    The ACLU has been at the forefront of    the struggle to rein in the surveillance superstructure, which    strikes at the core of our rights to privacy, free speech, and    association.  <\/p>\n<p>    The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (FAA)    gives the NSA almost unchecked power to monitor Americans    international phone calls, text messages, and emails  under    the guise of targeting foreigners abroad. The ACLU has long    warned that one provision of the statute, Section 702, would be    used to eavesdrop on Americans private communications. In June    2013, The Guardian published documents provided by    whistleblower Edward Snowden confirming the massive scale of    this international dragnet. Recent disclosures also show that    an unknown number of purely domestic communications are    monitored, that     the rules that supposedly protect Americans'    privacy    are     weak and riddled with    exceptions, and    that     virtually every    email that goes into    or out of the United States is scanned for suspicious    keywords.  <\/p>\n<p>    In 2008, less than an hour after    President Bush signed the FAA into law, the ACLU filed a    lawsuit challenging its constitutionality. The    case,     Amnesty v.    Clapper, was filed    on behalf of a broad coalition of attorneys and organizations    whose work requires them to engage in sensitive and sometimes    privileged telephone and email communications with individuals    located abroad. But in a 54 ruling handed down in February    2013, the Supreme Court held that the ACLU plaintiffs did not    have standing to sue because they could not prove their    communications had actually been surveilled under the    law.  <\/p>\n<p>    In March 2015, the ACLU filed Wikimedia    Foundation v. NSA, a     lawsuit    challenging Upstream surveillance under the    FAA. Through Upstream surveillance, the U.S. government copies    and searches the contents of almost all international  and    many domestic  text-based internet communications. The suit    was brought on behalf of nine educational, legal, human rights,    and media organizations, including the Wikimedia Foundation,    operator of one of the most-visited websites on the internet.    Collectively, the plaintiffs engage in more than a trillion    sensitive internet communications every year, and each has been    profoundly harmed by NSA    surveillance.  <\/p>\n<p>    Executive Order 12,333, signed by    President Reagan in 1981 and modified many times since, is the    authority primarily relied upon by the intelligence agencies to    gather foreign intelligence outside of the United States.    Recent disclosures indicate that the U.S. government operates a    host of large-scale programs under EO 12333, many of which    appear to involve the collection of vast quantities of    Americans information. These programs have included, for    example, the NSAs collection of     billions of cellphone location records each day; its    recording of     every single cellphone call into, out of, and within at    least two countries; and its surreptitious     interception of data from Google and Yahoo user accounts as    that information travels between those companies data centers    located abroad.  <\/p>\n<p>    In December 2013, the ACLU, along with    the Media Freedom Information Access Clinic at Yale Law School,    filed a Freedom of Information Act     lawsuit demanding that the government release information    about its use of EO 12,333 to conduct surveillance of    Americans communications.  <\/p>\n<p>    For many years, the government claimed    sweeping authority under the Patriot Act to collect a record of    every single phone call made by every single American \"on an    ongoing daily basis.\" This program not only exceeded the    authority given to the government by Congress, but it violated    the right of privacy protected by the Fourth Amendment, and the    rights of free speech and association protected by the First    Amendment. For this reason, the ACLU        challenged the government's collection of our    phone records under    Section 215 of the Patriot Act just days after the program was    revealed in June 2013 by The Guardian. In May 2015, a court of    appeals found that the phone records program violated Section    215, and Congress allowed the provision to expire in June of    that year. The program was reformed by the USA Freedom Act,    which passed days later.  <\/p>\n<p>    To bring greater transparency to the    NSA's surveillance under the Patriot Act, the ACLU filed    two     motions with the secretive    FISC asking it to    release to the public its opinions authorizing the bulk    collection of Americans' data by the    NSA.  <\/p>\n<p>    Our earlier work to reform the Patriot    Act includes a number of successful challenges to the    government's use of and secrecy    surrounding     National Security    Letters.  <\/p>\n<p>    The ACLU has long fought to bring    greater transparency and public access to the FISC  the    secretive court that oversees the governments surveillance    programs. When the FISC was first established in 1978, it    primarily assessed individual surveillance applications to    determine whether there was probable cause to believe a    specific surveillance target was an agent of a foreign power.    In recent years, however, the FISCs responsibilities have    changed dramatically, and the FISC today oversees sweeping    surveillance programs and assesses their constitutionality     all without any public participation or    review.  <\/p>\n<p>    The ACLU has been advocating and    petitioning for access to the FISC for more than a decade,    working with Congress and the executive branch, and appearing    before the court itself to push for greater transparency. Days    after the courts Section 215 order was published in the press    in June 2013, we filed a     motion    seeking access to the secret judicial    opinions underlying the NSA's mass call tracking program. We    have since filed two other access motions in the FISC, seeking    significant legal opinions authorizing bulk collection and    those interpreting the governments secret surveillance powers    in the years after 9\/11. We also signed a brief filed in the    FISC in     support    of the First Amendment rights of the    recipients of FISC orders, such as telephone and internet    companies, to release information about the type and volume of    national security requests they receive from the NSA and the    FBI.  <\/p>\n<p>    Secret law has no place in a democracy.    Under the First Amendment, the public has a qualified right of    access to FISC opinions concerning the scope, meaning, or    constitutionality of the surveillance laws, and that right    clearly applies to legal opinions interpreting Americans'    bedrock constitutional rights. We all have a right to know, at    least in general terms, what kinds of information the    government is collecting about innocent Americans, on what    scale, and based on what legal    theory.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>See the original post:<br \/>\n<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/issues\/national-security\/privacy-and-surveillance\/nsa-surveillance\" title=\"NSA Surveillance | American Civil Liberties Union\">NSA Surveillance | American Civil Liberties Union<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> The National Security Agencys mass surveillance has greatly expanded in the years since September 11, 2001. Disclosures have shown that, until recently, the government regularly tracked the calls of hundreds of millions of Americans.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/nsa-2\/nsa-surveillance-american-civil-liberties-union\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[94881],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-207621","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-nsa-2"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207621"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=207621"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207621\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=207621"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=207621"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=207621"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}