Theres actually word that the Supreme Court may have to readdress a case theyvrejected earlier this year on NSA spying. What happened, is when this case made it to the SCOTUS, the Solicitor General had argued that the person suing the Govt didnt have legal standing (basically whether that person was affected by the law and therefore has right to challenge that law) and the suit be thrown own and the judgement defers to the ruling of the lower court. The plaintiff lacked standing to challenge the case because the law required that anyone who was being charged with a crime using evidence gathered by these NSA programs had to be told so their Defense can defend them adequately. But the problem, the people being charged using evidence from these programs were never told. Had it not been for Sen. Diane Feinstein GLOATING on the Senate floor of dozens of examples of cases where criminals were caught using these programs, naming names of specific people. Yet no documents pertaining to those mentioned, contained ANY reference to any evidence gathered by NSA. Evidence that was required by law to be disclosed to the suspect in question. This caused Solicitor General Don Virilli to have an attack of Conscious and tell the Supreme Court Justices that they based their Ruling off of information he had given them...information that he himself was given from within the Obama Admin... that wasnt true. This would mean the ruling was made in error and should be readdressed. Just the backstory for the picture =p
Posted on: Sun, 03 Nov 2013 08:19:48 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015