seccirc第二巡回法院反对大宗托收的裁决对USA PATRIOT法案再授权的潜在影响

免费文档

VIP文档

ID:29152

大小:0.11 MB

页数:2页

时间:2023-01-10

金币:0

上传者:战必胜
Legal Sidebar
The Potential Impact of the Second Circuit’s Ruling
Against Bulk Collection on USA PATRIOT Act
Reauthorization
5/8/2015
On May 7, 2015, a federal appeals court issued a decision in American Civil Liberties Union v. Clapper
that could have
significant implications for both the telephone metadata collection program operated by the National Security Agency
(NSA) and the legislative debate surrounding consideration of the USA FREEDOM Act of 2015 (H.R. 2048 S. 1123)
currently taking place in the House and the Senate. While the ruling did not reach the question of whether the collection
itself was a violation of the Fourth Amendment, the court did reject the government’s use of Section 215 of the USA
PATRIOT Act of 2001 (as amended) to effectuate the bulk collection of telephone records by the NSA.
In brief, the court in ACLU v. Clapper held:
1. that the plaintiffs had standing to challenge the NSA program;
2. that Congress did not preclude judicial review of whether the NSA program exceeded the authority provided
under Section 215; and
3. that the government had failed to demonstrate that the bulk telephone records held by telephone service providers
were relevant to an authorized foreign intelligence investigation, as required by Section 215.
The Second Circuit’s decision arrives in the midst of Congress’s consideration of legislation that would reauthorize
Section 215, which is scheduled to expire on June 1, 2015. Much of the debate has centered on whether Section 215
should be allowed to lapse, be reauthorized without modification (e.g., S. 1035), or be amended to limit its use for
programs like the NSA telephone metadata program (e.g., the USA FREEDOM Act). While the full implications of the
decision in ACLU v. Clapper may not be known for some time (particularly with respect to its holdings on standing and
preclusion of judicial review), it is likely that the decision will have a substantial impact on the current legislative
debate surrounding reauthorization. In particular, legislators may wish to keep the following observations in mind.
The decision does not immediately bar operation of the NSA telephone metadata program. Though the Second
Circuit ruled against the government, the court neither ordered the government to cease operation of the NSA telephone
metadata program, nor to cease collection of telephone records in bulk under Section 215. Instead, the court remanded
the case to the district court to determine whether a preliminary injunction is appropriate in this case.
The decision is based on statutory language that can be amended by Congress. As noted above, the court reached
its decision after concluding that the government had not met its statutory burden of showing that the bulk telephone
records were “relevant to an authorized investigation,” as required by Section 215. The court acknowledged the
argument that such collection may be a violation of the Fourth Amendment, but did not reach the merits of that
question. As a statutory decision, Congress is free to exercise its legislative authority to amend the statute, potentially
modifying or limiting the scope or effect of the Second Circuit’s decision. The court commented expressly on the
ongoing legislative debate surrounding potential reform of Section 215, and strongly suggested that Congress, and not
the judiciary, is the more appropriate forum for balancing the unique national security and privacy interests at stake
with this and other foreign intelligence programs.
As a procedural matter, amending Section 215 to either expressly permit or prohibit bulk collection may render the
资源描述:

当前文档最多预览五页,下载文档查看全文

此文档下载收益归作者所有

当前文档最多预览五页,下载文档查看全文
温馨提示:
1. 部分包含数学公式或PPT动画的文件,查看预览时可能会显示错乱或异常,文件下载后无此问题,请放心下载。
2. 本文档由用户上传,版权归属用户,天天文库负责整理代发布。如果您对本文档版权有争议请及时联系客服。
3. 下载前请仔细阅读文档内容,确认文档内容符合您的需求后进行下载,若出现内容与标题不符可向本站投诉处理。
4. 下载文档时可能由于网络波动等原因无法下载或下载错误,付费完成后未能成功下载的用户请联系客服处理。
关闭