NSL's [was TrueCrypt]

[Cathal Garvey]

The problem as I see it is that those who have chosen to battle NSLs on
constitutional grounds have undermined their own assertion of
constitutional right by keeping the NSLs secret while they await their
day in court.

If you believe you have a constitutional right not to be bullied by
secret police and being forced to keep that a secret, then you should
just come out and say what's happening. That way, the highly political
court that's going to try to indict you anyway will at least have to
operate under public scrutiny and criticism.

Of course, the rational thing to do is to keep quiet and do as
instructed by the stasi, or to flee the country to somewhere that
recognises amnesty from history's largest and best armed superpower.
Good luck with the latter.

On 30/05/14 19:25, grarpamp wrote:
>> Have NSLs held up in court against the First Amendment?
> 
>> It's already constitutional that freedom of speech cannot be prevented
>> except to prevent immediate, tangible harm to others.
>> If you want
>> to challenge them, publish one on your blog and say "sue me, let's see what
>> the supreme court says".
> 
> This above is exactly one of the key issues. Either
> - You have the right to speak freely under the 1st, or you don't.
> - NSL's are 4th compliant warrants, or common orders/subpoenas,
> having all been reviewed and issued by a judge having jurisdiction,
> subject to challenge, etc... or they aren't.
> - The FISA court is a proper court established, operating and
> regulated under the judicial branch, beholden to the Supreme, or it isn't.
> 
> Some say: You do, they're toilet paper, it's legislative or executive.
> With thousands of letters issued there are similarly many chances
> to challenge it, yet so far it seems only a few have started on the
> direct route and everyone else seems too chicken. That ratio could
> really be improved.
> 
> [For the schemers, and though not really a proper stand up fight,
> there are probably even a few dual citizens who have received
> them who could just as happily relocate back home offshore
> and publish (if not fight) from there. You at least retain the first
> person perspective that way.]
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Letter
> http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_amendment
> http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fourth_amendment
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act
> 

-- 
T: @onetruecathal, @IndieBBDNA
P: +353876363185
W: http://indiebiotech.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0x988B9099.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 6176 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20140530/7e169105/attachment-0002.key>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 901 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20140530/7e169105/attachment-0002.sig>