SCOTUS refused to hear EPIC’s challenge against the FISA court in regards to the broad surveillance the NSA is enganged in.
I will say, that on the surface, this appears cowardly. But the article does mention a number of similar cases are filed. So perhaps there is in this queue a better case, litigant, etc. In which I will hold out to hear. But I am disappointed that no comment was provided. And if ALL these other cases are dismissed in similar fashion. I would call SCOTUS cowardly and derelict in duty.
Who, if not the Supreme Court, is to review the actions of other courts on their merits of violating the Constitution. If they refuse to hear and address all of the cases filed, then I believe that the SCOTUS members would need to be removed from office.
And I am sorry, while I may not be a Constitutional scholar, I am pretty darn sure that if reviewed objectively, what is being done is clearly without a doubt unconstitutional.
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Regardless if email, cell phones, etc. did not exist, papers were clearly the form of communication in the day. And it is protected, as such it is a fair extension. Afterall, we do call it electronic mail for a reason. And if not papers, than they are “my effects”.
Second, a warrant is to require probable cause, and that is supposed to be toward an individual or narrow group of individuals. Not a blanket warrant for every person in the nation.
Third, a warrant is to be specific, denote what is to be searched or seized. Saying we’re going to seize a copy of every email, is not specific.