[Peace-discuss] Who wants to restore the Constitution?

[Karen Medina]

yes!!!!!!!!!

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Stuart Levy <slevy at ncsa.illinois.edu> wrote:
> Re 'Who wants ...': Hearteningly, there are judges still willing to throw
> sand in the works, who believe that Fourth Amendment protections
> do mean something:
>
>    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/federal-court-e-mail-entitled-to-fourth-amendment-protection/
>
>    In what could turn out to be a landmark case, a three-judge panel of the
>    Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that email held on an ISP server
>    is subject to the protections of the Fourth Amendment: In a landmark
>    decision issued today in the criminal appeal of U.S. v. Warshak, the
>    Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the government must have a
>    search warrant before it can secretly seize and search emails stored by
>    email service providers.  Closely tracking arguments made by
>    EFF [Electronic Frontier Foundation, eff.org] in its amicus brief,
>    the court found that email users have the same reasonable expectation
>    of privacy in their stored email as they do in their phone calls and postal mail.
>   [...]
>    [T]he police may not storm the post office and intercept a letter,
>    and they are likewise forbidden from using the phone system to make
>    a clandestine recording of a telephone call–unless they get a
>    warrant, that is. It only stands to reason that, if government agents
>    compel an ISP to surrender the contents of a subscriber’s emails,
>    those agents have thereby conducted a Fourth Amendment search,
>    which necessitates compliance with the warrant requirement….
>   [...]
>    This holding only applies in the Sixth Circuit for the moment and it will
>    be up to other courts across the country to apply the holding.  Hopefully,
>    they’ll do the right thing.
>
>