Passed in Missouri and to the Voters: Bill to Protect Electronic Communications and Data

 

A parody of the National Security Administration's logo, created by EFF designer Hugh D'Andrade to help publicize EFF's case against NSA illegal spying, 1st Unitarian v. NSA: https://www.eff.org/node/75009

EFF

Wikimedia.org

.....

Tenth Amendment Center

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo., May 16, 2014 –  Legislation to protect electronic communications and data was given final approval by the Missouri State Senate today. Because it is a proposal for a state constitutional amendment, it will now bypass the Governor’s desk, instead going directly to the People on the ballot this November.

When proponents of mass, warrantless surveillance are backed into a corner on the basis that such activities violate the 4th Amendment’s warrant requirements, they often make the claim that electronic data is outside the scope of the amendment because it doesn’t qualify as “persons, houses, papers, or effects.”

Instead of worrying about a long legal debate with opponents who likely hold a political agenda, the Missouri legislature took a different path. They passed legislation to expressly give “electronic data and communications” the same state constitutional protections as “persons, homes, papers and effects.”

Introduced by Sen. Rob Schaaf, Senate Joint Resolution 27 (SJR27) was passed by the full House today. It previously passed the Senate by a vote of 31-1.

The text of SJR27 is short and concise, replacing the “privacy rights” section in the state constitution with the following language adding electronic communications to the objects protected from search or seizure without a warrant.

“That the people shall be secure in their persons, papers,  homes [and], effects, and electronic communications and data, from unreasonable searches and seizures; and no warrant to search any place, or seize any person or thing, or access electronic data or communication, shall issue without describing the place to be searched, or the person or thing to be seized, or the data or communication to be accessed, as nearly as may be; nor without probable cause, supported by written oath or affirmation.”

The effect of this resolution would be significant. The addition of electronic communications to the list of privacy items would make emails, phone records, Internet records and other electronic information gathered without a warrant inadmissible in state court. That would include data gathered illegally by overzealous state and local law enforcement as well as the federal government.

Read More Here

Related articles

• Missouri Bill to Protect Electronic Communications and Data Bypasses Governor and Moves to Voters
• Passed in Missouri and to the Voters: Bill to Protect Electronic Communications and Data
• Protect your email and cellphone? Missouri could add to constitution
• Missouri Bill to Protect Electronic Data Passes House Committee
• Missouri Bill to Protect Electronic Communications and Data Bypasses Governor and Moves to Voters
• Missouri Senate passes bill to protect electronic data and communications

U.S. Supreme Court to weigh cell phone searches by police

By Lawrence Hurley

WASHINGTON Fri Jan 17, 2014 4:10pm EST

News microphones wait to capture reactions from U.S. Supreme Court rulings outside the court building in Washington, June 25, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Jonathan Ernst

(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Friday to decide whether police can search an arrested criminal suspect's cell phone without a warrant in two cases that showcase how the courts are wrestling to keep up with rapid technological advances.
Taking up cases from California and Massachusetts arising from criminal prosecutions that used evidence obtained without a warrant, the high court will wade into how to apply older court precedent, which allows police to search items carried by a defendant at the time of arrest, to cell phones.
Cell phones have evolved from devices used exclusively to make calls into gadgets that now contain a bounty of personal information about the owner.
The legal question before the justices is whether a search for such information after a defendant is arrested violates the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which bans unreasonable searches. The outcome would determine whether prosecutors in such circumstances could submit evidence gleaned from cell phones in court.
Digital rights activists have sounded the alarm about the amount of personal data the government can now easily access, not just in the criminal context, but also in relation to national security surveillance programs.
President Barack Obama on Friday announced plans to rein in the vast collection of Americans' phone data in a series of limited reforms prompted by disclosures by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden about the sweep of U.S. eavesdropping activities.
Stanford Law School professor Jeffrey Fisher, who represents one of the defendants, said in court papers that it was important for the high court to decide the issue.
"In light of the frequency with which people are arrested with cell phones and the judiciary's confusion over whether the police may search the digital contents of those phones, this court's intervention is critical," Fisher said.
According to a 2013 report by the Pew Research Center, 91 percent of adult Americans have a cell phone, more than a half of which are smartphones that can connect to the Internet and contain personal data from social media websites and other sources.
Under court precedent, police are permitted to search at the time of an arrest without a warrant, primarily to ensure the defendant is not armed and to secure evidence that could otherwise be destroyed. In the past, it has applied to such items as wallets, calendars, address books and diaries.

Read More here

Related articles

• U.S. Supreme Court to weigh cell phone searches by police
• U.S. Supreme Court to weigh cell phone searches by police
• Supreme Court to hear 'smartphone' and cell phone search cases

Constitution Free Zones in The United States

Story Leak.com

Anthony Gucciardi

DHS ‘Constitution Free’ Zones Inside US Ignored By Media

by Anthony Gucciardi
August 5th, 2013
Updated 08/05/2013 at 12:00 pm

In what should be front page news blasted out nationwide as a breaking news alert, the DHS has openly established extensive ‘Constitution free zones’ in which your Fourth Amendment does not exist. 
It’s not ‘conspiracy’ and it’s not fraud, the DHS has literally created an imaginary ‘border’ within the United States that engulfs 100 miles from every single end of the nation. Within this fabricated ‘border’, the DHS can search your electronic belongings for no reason. We’re talking about no suspicion, no reasonable cause, nothing. No reason whatsoever is required under their own regulations. The DHS is now above the Constitution under their own rules, and even Wired magazine authors were amazed at the level of pure tyranny going on here.
This ‘border’ even includes where the US land meets oceans in addition to legitimate borders with Mexico and Canada. As a result, you have over 197 million citizens suffocated in these 100 mile ‘border zones’ that include major cities like New York City, Houston, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia. Checkout the graphic below for a visual representation, with the orange area representing the Constitution free zone as designated by the DHS:

What’s even more amazing, is that this has been going on since 2008. That’s about 5 years of absolute unconstitutional abuse of power by the Department of Homeland Security that the media fails to even document. That’s 197 million citizens living without a Constitution as far as the DHS is concerned, and apparently the Department of Justice (DOJ) must be pretty content too. Amazingly, no one has challenged this besides the ACLU, which was contacted following the case of a man who was actually detained within the 100 mile ‘border’ area.


Read More Here

Related articles

• DHS 'Constitution Free' Zones Inside US Ignored By Media
• DHS 'Constitution Free' Zones Inside US Ignored By Media
• DHS Demanding Permit for all Live Music Played in the U.S.
• The Department of Homeland Security Says It Is Illegal to Freely Play Music in the Ussa
• The U.S. Border Is Now Considered A 'Constitution-Free Zone'...
• Do You Have ANY IDEA How Widespread Government Spying Really Is?
• Homeland Security Approves Seizure of Cell Phones and Laptops within 100 Miles of Border; Report Remains Secret
• Homeland Security Extends "Constitution-Free Zone" #N3
• Homeland Security can search your laptop at the border on just a hunch

Ron Paul's Texas Straight Talk 6/10/13: Government Spying: Should We Be Shocked?

minnesotachris

Published on Jun 9, 2013

http://The-FREE-Foundation.org http://RonPaulCurriculum.com http://RonPaulInstitute.org http://CampaignForLiberty.org http://DailyPaul.com http://FFF.org http://Mises.org http://LewRockwell.com


Government Spying: Should We Be Shocked? by Ron Paul Last week we saw dramatic new evidence of illegal government surveillance of our telephone calls, and of the National Security Agency's deep penetration into American companies such as Facebook and Microsoft to spy on us. The media seemed shocked. Many of us are not so surprised. Some of us were arguing back in 2001 with the introduction of the so-called PATRIOT Act that it would pave the way for massive US government surveillance—not targeting terrorists but rather aimed against American citizens. We were told we must accept this temporary measure to provide government the tools to catch those responsible for 9/11. That was nearly twelve years and at least four wars ago. We should know by now that when it comes to government power-grabs, we never go back to the status quo even when the "crisis" has passed. That part of our freedom and civil liberties once lost is never regained. How many times did the PATRIOT Act need renewed? How many times did FISA authority need expanded? Why did we have to pass a law to grant immunity to companies who hand over our personal information to the government? It was all a build-up of the government's capacity to monitor us. The reaction of some in Congress and the Administration to last week's leak was predictable. Knee-jerk defenders of the police state such as Senator Lindsey Graham declared that he was "glad" the government was collecting Verizon phone records—including his own—because the government needs to know what the enemy is up to. Those who take an oath to defend the Constitution from its enemies both foreign and domestic should worry about such statements. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers tells us of the tremendous benefits of this Big Brother-like program. He promises us that domestic terrorism plots were thwarted, but he cannot tell us about them because they are classified. I am a bit skeptical, however. In April, the New York Times reported that most of these domestic plots were actually elaborate sting operations developed and pushed by the FBI. According to the Times report, "of the 22 most frightening plans for attacks since 9/11 on American soil, 14 were developed in sting operations." Even if Chairman Rogers is right, though, and the program caught someone up to no good, we have to ask ourselves whether even such a result justifies trashing the Constitution. Here is what I said on the floor of the House when the PATRIOT Act was up for renewal back in 2011: "If you want to be perfectly safe from child abuse and wife beating, the government could put a camera in every one of our houses and our bedrooms, and maybe there would be somebody made safer this way, but what would you be giving up? Perfect safety is not the purpose of government. What we want from government is to enforce the law to protect our liberties." What most undermines the claims of the Administration and its defenders about this surveillance program is the process itself. First the government listens in on all of our telephone calls without a warrant and then if it finds something it goes to a FISA court and get an illegal approval for what it has already done! This turns the rule of law and due process on its head. The government does not need to know more about what we are doing. We need to know more about what the government is doing. We need to turn the cameras on the police and on the government, not the other way around. We should be thankful for writers like Glenn Greenwald, who broke last week's story, for taking risks to let us know what the government is doing. There are calls for the persecution of Greenwald and the other whistle-blowers and reporters. They should be defended, as their work defends our freedom.    

 **************************************************************************

Ron Paul: The Fourth Amendment is Clear

By Tim Shoemaker on June 6, 2013 in National Blog

SPRINGFIELD, Virginia- Campaign for Liberty Chairman Ron Paul condemned reports that the Obama Administration is secretly collecting data from the phone calls of millions of Americans: “I wish I could say I was shocked at the reports the NSA is secretly spying on the private phone calls of millions of Verizon customers. However, this is a predictable result of a government that continues to erode our liberties while promising some glimmering hope of security. “The Fourth Amendment is clear; it says we should be secure in our persons, houses, papers and effects, and that all warrants must have probable cause. “I opposed and continue to oppose the Patriot Act because I believe it throws the Fourth Amendment right out the window. It is certainly not patriotic to support warrantless wiretaps, blanket ‘metadata’ collection, and spying on innocent American citizens. “Unfortunately, what is worse than the reports, is knowing that politicians of both parties will continue to defend this practice as necessary to supposedly keep us ‘safe’. We do not have to sacrifice our liberties for security. At times like this, the question must be asked, ‘if we are willing to change our way of life and our very definition of freedom while tolerating the invasive searches at our airports and now of our phone calls, have the terrorists already won?’”

  ********************************************************************************

Related articles

• Ron Paul condemns reports of NSA secret seizure of Verizon phone records (theglobaldispatch.com)
• Ron Paul Reacts to Government Spying on Americans: What Did You Expect? (financearmageddon.blogspot.com)
• Rep. Ron Paul Calls NSA Spying a Victory for Terrorists, Some Senators Say It's Fine (dailytech.com)
• Government Spying: Should We Be Shocked? (ronpaulnews.net)
• Ron Paul: We Don't Have to Sacrifice our Liberties for Security (ronpaul.com)
• Government Spying: Should We Really Be Shocked? (freedomoutpost.com)
• Spy state shock: Gmail, Yahoo Mail, Facebook, Skype, AOL, Apple all secretly sharing private user communications with NSA (12160.info)
• Ron Paul Reacts to Gov't Spying on Americans: What Did You Expect? (dailypaul.com)