Latest Breaking News

Omaha Steve

(99,470 posts) Tue Jun 3, 2014, 08:46 PM Jun 2014

Federal judge dismisses lawsuit

Source: AP-Excite

BOISE, Idaho (AP) — A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit an Idaho woman filed against President Barack Obama and other federal officials over the National Security Agency's collection of cellphone information.

U.S. District Judge Lynn Winmill ruled Tuesday that under current U.S. Supreme Court precedents, the NSA's collection of cellphone data doesn't violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Anna J. Smith of Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. The Spokesman-Review reports that her lawyers plan to appeal.

FULL short story at link.

Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20140603/us-nsa-surveillance-lawsuit-e91c736d01.html

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Federal judge dismisses lawsuit (Original Post) Omaha Steve Jun 2014 OP

The case should have been dismissed on standing grounds, unless this woman was harmed in some merrily Jun 2014 #1

Because the "penalty" for violating the Fourth Amendment... jberryhill Jun 2014 #3

? Not sure what you are saying, or what it has to do with my post? merrily Jun 2014 #4

Her lawyers seem to have been her husband Peter J. Smith and a Republican state legislator struggle4progress Jun 2014 #2

Seems the ACLU is somehow involved as well. merrily Jun 2014 #5

merrily

(45,251 posts)

1. The case should have been dismissed on standing grounds, unless this woman was harmed in some

Reply to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Tue Jun 3, 2014, 09:00 PM

Jun 2014

way different from the way all of us are harmed by the snooping. But, there is no Supreme Court precedent as yet that disposes of a case involving what the US is doing now. Scalia practically said as much recently, though not while in court.

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)

3. Because the "penalty" for violating the Fourth Amendment...

Reply to merrily (Reply #1)

Tue Jun 3, 2014, 10:12 PM

Jun 2014

...is exclusion of evidence gained by the violation to obtain a conviction of the person whose rights were violated.

Apart from the standing issue, what harm was she alleging?

merrily

(45,251 posts)

4. ? Not sure what you are saying, or what it has to do with my post?

Reply to jberryhill (Reply #3)

Tue Jun 3, 2014, 10:32 PM

Jun 2014

The issue is whether there was Supreme Court precedent that required the dismissal of the case.

And the harm alleged is not apart from the standing issue. The kind of harm alleged determines the standing issue.

I don't know which question your "because" clause relates to.

Sorry, I can't make out what your reply is about.

struggle4progress

(118,198 posts)

2. Her lawyers seem to have been her husband Peter J. Smith and a Republican state legislator

Reply to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Tue Jun 3, 2014, 09:39 PM

Jun 2014

Luke T. Malek

Local woman sues Obama over privacy
Posted: Thursday, June 13, 2013 11:40 am
By DAVID COLE Staff writer
COEUR d’ALENE — Coeur d’Alene attorney Peter J. Smith IV and Idaho state legislator Luke T. Malek, who also is an attorney, filed a lawsuit Wednesday afternoon against President Obama and several high-ranking federal officials ... The plaintiff in the case is Anna J. Smith, Peter Smith’s wife, Malek told The Press ...

merrily

(45,251 posts)

5. Seems the ACLU is somehow involved as well.

Reply to struggle4progress (Reply #2)

Tue Jun 3, 2014, 10:39 PM

Jun 2014

I can't tell from the wording whether the ACLU joined this suit or filed a separate suit. It also does not seem that the plaintiff alleged any specific injury to her that is different from the injury to the populace in general. If that is correct, that reinforces that this case should have been dismissed on standing grounds. I am surprised that the ACLU would get involved in a case that lacks standing.

I don't get what happened.

Reply to this discussion