
Twitter Sues Federal Government - coloneltcb
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3538047-Twitter-Complaint.html
======
RangerScience
Okay, what seems to be going on is:

a) DHS / Customs & Border Protection want to unmask the person(s) behind the
@ALT_USCIS account

b) They want to use an unnamed "investigatory tool" to do this

c) Twitter does not want them to do this, on (extensive) 1st amendment grounds

d) Twitter says the Supreme Court is on their side on this issue

The lawsuit is to stop DHS / CBP from using the tool.

The "tool" is a legal "tool" \- an ability granted to the agencies to legally
compel Twitter to do stuff.

The reasonable editorial is then that the Government wants to do this because
they don't like being criticized or contradicted by these ALT_* accounts, and
Twitter wants the accounts to stay anonymous because the criticism is good
(both in terms of quality and effect), and taking away that anonymity is all
kinds of bad.

(I'm _totally_ on Twitter's side on this)

~~~
oligopoly
And the reason for the unmasking request from the article:

>@ALT_uscis is one of a string of accounts claiming to be operated by rogue
government employees, formed in the wake of Donald Trump’s inauguration. It’s
unclear whether any of the accounts are authentic — including @ALT_uscis —
although many purport to offer an insider perspective. The Trump
administration has responded aggressively to leaks in the past, including on-
the-spot phone checks of White House staffers suspected of sharing information
with the press.

Imagine George W. Bush has his stooges trying to undermine and overthrow Obama
if you don't see why this would be problematic for current administration.

~~~
navbaker
Is "overthrow" your hyperbolic way of saying "using free speech to dissent"?

------
zaroth
DHS is requesting the data pursuant to 19 US § 1509 - Examination of books and
witnesses;

    
    
      In any investigation or inquiry conducted for the purpose of ascertaining the
      correctness of any entry, for determining the liability of any person for duty,
      fees and taxes due or duties, fees and taxes which may be due the United States,
      for determining liability for fines and penalties, or for insuring compliance with
      the laws of the United States administered by the United States Customs Service...
    

So it's that last part, _for insuring compliance with the laws of the United
States administered by the United States Customs Service_ which probably comes
into play in making the request to unmask the account, specifically because
the account claims to be an employee of USCIS.

~~~
Mendenhall
I think many miss this point, in particular about claiming to be employee of
USCIS. I could see complications to the "free speech" defense because of that.
Will be interesting to watch.

------
danso
Before people start comparing this to the John Rivello case last month (the
guy accused of tweeting a seizure-inducing GIF), Twitter released information
in response to police warrants:

[https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3520966-FBI-
Complain...](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3520966-FBI-Complaint-vs-
John-Rivello-in-Kurt-Eichenwald.html)

It doesn't appear that a warrant was used in this case, which is in part why
Twitter isn't complying.

------
firloop
A comical bit from the filing:

>The CBP Summons ordered Twitter to produce the records to a CBP office in
Washington D.C. by 11:45 A.M. on March 13, 2017—the day _before_ the CBP
Summons was faxed to Twitter.

------
matt4077
I feel the urgent need to express my gratitude to Twitter for fighting this,
instead of quietly handing over the information.

I'm sure the cynic in all of us says they're doing this for the PR value. If
so, let's make sure they get their money's worth.

~~~
kevinburke
> the cynic in all of us says they're doing this for the PR value.

I really doubt it. They were fighting NSL's even when they were prohibited
from disclosing that they were fighting them.

------
inputcoffee
This is the account:
[https://twitter.com/ALT_uscis](https://twitter.com/ALT_uscis)

~~~
mythrwy
Does anyone know why they would have such an interest in this person?

Scrolling back a few pages, apparently he is anti-current policy and pretty
vocal but that puts him in company with millions of others. So why the
interest?

~~~
zelon88
I'm honestly surprised anyone had to ask this question. Suppression Of Dissent
is actually a term. Why do hotels sue guests who post negative reviews on
Yelp? Why did the Stasi Police exist? Why is a clown poster of Putin illegal
in Russia?

We are being converted into an oligarchy. The administration is backed by a
demographic that either doesn't realize this, or doesn't care. They
unabashedly silence their opposition on the floors of Congress and the Senate
all the time. Can't get your legislation through? Change the rules.

The GOP has no constituents. Nobody with a net worth under $10,000,000 matters
to the GOP.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
> The GOP has no constituents. Nobody with a net worth under $10,000,000
> matters to the GOP.

You might re-examine that belief in light of the last election...

~~~
dopamean
I think there are a lot of people who support the GOP (evidenced by the last
election) but very few the GOP actually look out for.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Well, if _that 's_ the distinction we're talking about, then I would say that
the Democratic Party also has far fewer people that it looks out for than that
vote for it. They no longer seem to have the working class as a constituency,
for example.

~~~
nojvek
Trump was perceived as the lesser of the two evils. Looking at Hillary's
donation list, it was even more pronounced that she was a Corporation puppet.
Trump was the wild "fuck you" card who was perceived as the only candidate
that would not sell out.

~~~
klipt
Except Trump _is_ a corporation[1], which now gets federal money funneled into
its pockets every time the president golfs at Mar-a-lago.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trump_Organization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trump_Organization)

------
mjfern
For some reason, this post is being flagged off the home page. 106 points in 1
hour and it currently sits in the 16th position. Curious no?

~~~
archagon
HN _hates_ being reminded of politics, even when the news directly concerns
the Silicon Valley.

~~~
jacquesm
Too busy to change the world to pay attention to it.

------
slaymaker1907
Isn't this exactly what security and privacy experts have been warning about
for years?

------
gist
Meta question here. What, in legal fees, does a company like twitter with high
priced counsel pay for this type of action? Initially and let's say over the
course that it will run?

~~~
jacquesm
I've been on the offensive side in a lawsuit a couple of times and have spent
between 50K and 100K each time, but this was in Europe, and with weaker
defendants so I expect it to be easily a multiple in these cases.

------
TenOhms
So was the user(s) of the account leaking information illegally or not? May
not have any bearing on this, but it seems everyone is glossing over that
question for some reason. It's either a dissenter of which there are many, or
someone breaking the law and we should probably establish which.

~~~
mejari
The request for the user's details from the government doesn't allege illegal
leaking of information, so why is that relevant?

~~~
TenOhms
It's relevant because many are jumping on the Twitter is right bandwagon so
I'm wondering what information they have that I don't yet.

If it's not a legal matter, is it the DHS trying to find and discipline the
employee(s) for the alleged deeds?

~~~
wfo
If you're so concerned that the Trump administration is actually doing the
right thing here and they are being inappropriately maligned, you can
certainly go look at the legal request and check for yourself on what grounds
it was made. You don't need to wildly cast about searching for/inventing some
reason the government is right -- they are supposed to do that themselves and
write it up in a public legal document, it's called the rule of law.

------
shshhdhs
I'm truly tempted to claim that I'm the suspect. Thinking if it's worth
creating more accounts.

------
asimpletune
Does anyone have valid counter arguments to the plaintiff's?

~~~
gingerbread-man
I would imagine the government's case will center around a small number of
tweets which they will claim "leaked" confidential information.

If they can show probable cause that the owner of the account broke federal
law, they have legal grounds to demand Twitter release his information.

But unless he has released _classified_ information via the account, I'm not
sure what law they'll be able to allege he violated.

~~~
Steko
Except this isn't supposed to be investigating a leak, they're using a tool
designed to ensure proper tax on imports.

~~~
gingerbread-man
19 USC 1509 has a catchall that extends the SHS's authority to compel
documents to "insuring compliance with the laws of the United States
administered by the United States Customs Service." [1]

It's definitely a stretch.

[1]
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1509](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/19/1509)

------
apeace
Does anyone have a source (article) that states whether these Twitter accounts
were created via Tor?

I could have sworn I read that they were, but can't seem to find a reference
anymore.

~~~
eli
Who would know besides twitter and the account owner?

------
jacquesm
The Streisand effect at work.

------
williamle8300
They should have been doing this long before Trump and the "Red Scare."
Twitter has been around since the Patriot Act, and they never once backed down
from Obama's administration which saw massive overreach by the Federal Govt
that would make Bush Jr. blush.

Where was Twitter then?

~~~
fictioncircle
There is a difference between national security (even if its bs) and citizens
exercising their right to complain about government policy?

~~~
michaelmrose
The claim of national security can't hold any weight if its bs else any matter
you can imagine could become a matter of national security.

~~~
fictioncircle
> The claim of national security can't hold any weight if its bs else any
> matter you can imagine could become a matter of national security.

Good luck convincing the government of that. We are past that event horizon.
xD

