The transgression occurred at the National Security Agency and involved illegal spying on Americans. The details? They're scandalously classified.
For months, Senator Ron Wyden has been giving American citizens an extraordinary warning: The federal government is spying on us in ways that violate our privacy and would alarm us if we knew more, he insists, adding that he can't tell us any more because the details are classified.
Now Wyden has won a small victory. Thanks to his persistent efforts, he was granted permission to share with the public a small amount of previously classified information about the NSA's domestic spying. The most consequential revelation: "National Security Agency spy activities on at least one occasion have violated the Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure, according to a ruling by the U.S.'s secret national security court."
Put more succinctly, the Obama Administration violated the constitution. How did the NSA transgress against our Fourth Amendment rights? Incredibly, that bit of information remains classified. Citizens aren't permitted to know the details of their government's confirmed misbehavior.
Julian Sanchez explains why secrecy is particularly problematic in this case:
Now Wyden has won a small victory. Thanks to his persistent efforts, he was granted permission to share with the public a small amount of previously classified information about the NSA's domestic spying. The most consequential revelation: "National Security Agency spy activities on at least one occasion have violated the Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure, according to a ruling by the U.S.'s secret national security court."
Put more succinctly, the Obama Administration violated the constitution. How did the NSA transgress against our Fourth Amendment rights? Incredibly, that bit of information remains classified. Citizens aren't permitted to know the details of their government's confirmed misbehavior.
Julian Sanchez explains why secrecy is particularly problematic in this case:
More @ The Atlantic
No comments:
Post a Comment