
Ruling Unsealed: National Security Letters Upheld as Constitutional - DiabloD3
https://www.eff.org/press/releases/ruling-unsealed-national-security-letters-upheld-constitutional
======
umanwizard
I only had time to skim the ruling, but it seems like the petitioners only
raised First Amendment concerns. Can someone with more legal knowledge explain
if it's still possible to challenge NSLs on Fourth Amendment grounds? Has this
avenue of attack already been exhausted?

~~~
dogma1138
Not really, the NSL in essence is nothing but a gag order that prevents you
from notifying anyone when you are served with a warrant.

~~~
umanwizard
The relevant point is that the FBI can generate them unilaterally, whereas
normally warrants must be authorized by a court.

------
d33
This is truly depressing. Is there any backup plan in case the appeal gets
rejected?

~~~
existencebox
This is entirely a "what if", so realize that I'm aware of how absurd this
likely is.

Given how many NSLs are regularly given out (I believe we're well into tens of
thousands per year?) I wonder to what extent unified civil disobedience is a
viable answer. If thousands, or even hundreds of companies all decided to say
"I Have been NSLd, and I refuse to go quietly" would there even BE a useful
response the govt could take?

At the point that the govt can make secret rulings approving of secret
proceedings dispensing secret legislation, I see few other ways to address a
cyclically broken system.

~~~
r00fus
They will find someone/group and make an example; like what they did to the
CEO of Qwest.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-
switch/wp/2013/09/30...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-
switch/wp/2013/09/30/a-ceo-who-resisted-nsa-spying-is-out-of-prison-and-he-
feels-vindicated-by-snowden-leaks/)

~~~
existencebox
I didn't know about this instance, and it just convinces me further that
there's very little structural change that can be made to dislodge this. What
I read in that article is essentially material evidence of subversive tactics
to force compliance with an encroaching govt. This is probably another
"nothing new", but the phrasing of "might find difficult to get future
contracts" reeks so much of the old fashioned "would be a shame if something
happened to you" that it strikes a harder tone; and I am even now having
trouble reconciling (morally, not logically) how the _object_ of this behavior
is the one who endured jail time for it.

