777:
39:
747:
757:
767:
737:
180:
166:
831:
727:
807:
819:
843:
874:
862:
787:
1124:
case. In June 2014, the EFF requested an emergency hearing requesting that the court enforce the temporary restraining order, after discovering that the government had continued the destruction of evidence. The NSA filed a counter-motion claiming that altering its process of deleting records and
1140:
Upon the disclosure of more information about the NSA's surveillance methods, the EFF filed another motion in May 2017 requesting that the agency disclose information about surveillance conducted against
Carolyn Jewel and the other plaintiffs. Judge White granted this motion and ordered the
985:), which was capable of monitoring billions of bits of Internet traffic per second, including the playback of telephone calls routed on the Internet, and in effect spying upon the entirety of the communications of many American citizens and businesses who use the Internet.
1132:
In
February 2015, Judge White dismissed the latest motion by the EFF, accepting the NSA's argument that the requirements placed upon the agency would engender the "impermissible disclosure of state secret information," and he also held that the plaintiffs did not have
1006:
against the government on behalf of aggrieved citizens, with one named
Carolyn Jewel volunteering to be named in the suit. The government moved to dismiss the suit because the plaintiffs could not prove direct personal injury from the surveillance, and thus lacked
968:
in the United States, in which government security officials worked with telecommunications firms to surveil the personal communications of citizens under the guise of protecting the country against terrorism. At about the same time, former AT&T engineer
1108:
efforts. In
December 2013, the government again claimed the state secrets privilege and declassified documents detailing its process while reaching this decision. The NSA in the meantime was destroying the relevant records, because it was required under the
1141:
government to hand over the information. However, the NSA filed a motion in opposition to that order, claiming once again that the plaintiffs lacked the standing to sue. After further arguments, the
District Court accepted this argument in April 2019.
1929:
1171:
implications of its mass surveillance program via procedural arguments about the need to keep its methods secret, while claiming that individual citizens cannot prove direct harm from the program. However, citizens have been unable to demonstrate
1523:
1126:
1048:
1016:
929:
484:
1023:
dismissed the suit in
January 2010, holding that the plaintiffs lacked legal standing because their claims amounted to a "general grievance" against the government, with no evidence of direct personal injury.
1144:
The EFF appealed that ruling to the Ninth
Circuit. In a memorandum opinion, that court ruled in favor of the NSA, once again on the matter of standing. In June 2022, the EFF made a final request to the
664:
866:
530:
654:
1251:, complaint for constitutional and statutory violations, seeking damages, declaratory, and injunctive relief, United States District Court for the Northern District of California,
1365:
1028:
933:
49:
776:
1071:
631:
1934:
1168:
1094:
953:
449:
153:
1786:
Pugh, Megan (Fall 2021). "Privacy? What
Privacy?: Reforming the State Secrets Privilege to Protect Individual Privacy Rights from Expansive Government Surveillance".
1620:
Jewel v. National
Security Agency, Plaintiffs' Emergency Application to Enforce the Court's TRO, United States District for the Northern District of California,
1607:
Jewel v. National
Security Agency, Notice of Motion and Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, United States District for the Northern District of California,
965:
1939:
811:
1633:
Jewel v. National Security Agency, Emergency Motion to Stay the Court's June 5, 2014 Order, United States District for the Northern District of California,
1063:
756:
583:
626:
906:
1730:
Jewel v. National Security Agency, Order granting government's summary judgment motion, United States District for the Northern District of California,
1180:
situation. This has generated some criticism, because while the NSA's argument could possibly be justified under old evidence-gathering processes, the
847:
746:
1588:
1944:
1919:
1705:
766:
736:
679:
512:
502:
1441:
1924:
1236:
1205:
1137:
to pursue their claims. This procedural ruling allowed White to avoid addressing the constitutionality of the NSA's mass surveillance program.
1067:
823:
674:
1954:
1761:
1110:
464:
459:
149:
1339:
1567:
1200:
1184:
case did not address the much easier collection of personal information enabled by modern Internet and telecommunications technologies.
750:
659:
323:
1669:
1146:
1125:
revealing the targets of its ongoing surveillance operation would have severe consequences "including the possible suspension of the
1949:
38:
726:
545:
352:
780:
760:
426:
242:
1731:
1129:
program and potential loss of access to lawfully collected signals intelligence information on foreign intelligence targets."
1066:
testified in July 2012 in support of the EFF, claiming that the NSA was "purposefully violating the Constitution". The NSA's
999:
937:
899:
835:
328:
220:
507:
362:
790:
357:
770:
740:
479:
318:
1807:"A Proposal to Adopt Data Discrimination Rather than Privacy as the Justification for Rolling Back Data Surveillance"
1039:
On appeal, in December 2011 the Ninth Circuit initially reversed the District Court's dismissal of the complaint and
95:
Citizens wishing to file suit against the U.S. Government for warrantless telecommunications surveillance must prove
1608:
1621:
1176:
because the NSA has argued successfully that the evidence needed for that task must remain secret, thus creating a
281:
1100:
Later in 2013 the court ordered the NSA to explain the perceived impact of the recent Snowden revelations on the
892:
179:
165:
1085:
and allowed the EFF class action suit to continue, further holding that the surveillance program constituted a
1040:
974:
941:
730:
170:
1747:
1082:
1044:
1012:
878:
565:
1648:
1359:
669:
1865:
Cohn, Cindy (2016). "Protecting the Fourth Amendment in the Information Age: A Response to Robert Litt".
786:
474:
948:. The EFF alleged that the NSA's surveillance program was an "illegal and unconstitutional program of
1653:
697:
588:
120:
1692:
1528:
1312:
454:
414:
303:
237:
232:
184:
124:
1455:
1828:
1593:
1293:
1086:
949:
1194:
535:
1887:
1634:
1252:
1117:
1105:
1506:"Sworn Declaration of Whistleblower William Binney on NSA Domestic Surveillance Capabilities"
1818:
1674:
1460:
1416:
1317:
1177:
560:
550:
313:
308:
215:
555:
210:
116:
100:
1505:
1120:, requiring the NSA to halt the destruction of evidence until a final resolution of the
1519:
1173:
1134:
1090:
1043:
the case back to the lower court to further determine the validity of the government's
1008:
945:
940:(EFF) on behalf of American citizens who believed that they had been surveilled by the
818:
608:
96:
1691:, Civil Minute Order, United States District for the Northern District of California,
1553:
1913:
1832:
1483:
1078:
1060:
1020:
257:
1411:
1003:
978:
925:
540:
394:
1823:
1806:
1524:"Edward Snowden, after months of NSA revelations, says his mission's accomplished"
1011:
to sue, while the surveillance program itself could remain confidential under the
842:
598:
469:
1762:"EFF's Flagship Jewel v. NSA Dragnet Spying Case Rejected by the Supreme Court"
1266:
1151:
970:
593:
252:
1210:
982:
830:
797:
649:
603:
404:
384:
298:
269:
247:
17:
1313:"The NSA Is Building the Country's Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say)"
187:
as of 2007, with countries subject to the most data collection shown in red
1930:
United States District Court for the Northern District of California cases
1902:
1706:"Judge Orders Government to Provide Evidence About Internet Surveillance"
702:
399:
347:
1589:"White House Tries to Prevent Judge From Ruling on Surveillance Efforts"
1149:
to take the case, but that court rejected the request and did not grant
1846:
Litt, Robert S. (2016). "The Fourth Amendment in the Information Age".
873:
431:
409:
389:
374:
293:
205:
1070:
program then became a matter of widespread public knowledge upon the
861:
806:
379:
1893:
1384:
342:
1572:
1294:"White House Begins New Effort to Defend Surveillance Program"
1346:. May 17, 2006. Archived from the original on March 28, 2014
1051:
but with few new developments for about the next 18 months.
1746:, 9th Circuit Opinion (August 17, 2021), memorandum order,
1412:"Obama Claims Immunity, As New Spy Case Takes Center Stage"
981:
surveillance system in its San Francisco switching center (
952:
communications surveillance" and claimed violations of the
1568:"Judge: Lawsuit alleging illegal NSA spying may continue"
1670:"Judge Dismisses Challenge to NSA Internet Surveillance"
1484:"9th Circuit Allows Wiretap Suit Against NSA to Proceed"
1587:
Savage, Charlie; Sanger, David. E (December 21, 2013).
1113:
to delete any such records after a proscribed period.
1049:
District Court for the Northern District of California
1017:
District Court for the Northern District of California
930:
District Court for the Northern District of California
1905:. Electronic Frontier Foundation. November 30, 2012.
50:
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1292:Sanger, David E.; O'Neil, John (January 23, 2006).
143:
135:
130:
112:
107:
89:
81:
73:
65:
55:
45:
31:
1167:is that the U.S. government was able to avoid the
1364:: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (
1228:
1226:
1116:In March 2014, Judge White imposed a temporary
632:Global surveillance disclosures (2013–present)
1093:for each search, per the requirements of the
900:
8:
964:In 2006, journalists revealed a widespread
973:revealed that the company had allowed the
907:
893:
160:
37:
28:
1935:Electronic Frontier Foundation litigation
1822:
1047:claim. The case was thus returned to the
60:Carolyn Jewel v. National Security Agency
1222:
924:, 673 F.3d 902 (9th Cir., 2011), was a
680:Mass surveillance in the United Kingdom
163:
1357:
1206:Mass surveillance in the United States
934:Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
675:Mass surveillance in the United States
1647:Hattern, Julian (February 10, 2015).
1508:. Public Intelligence. July 16, 2012.
1265:Mullins, K. J. (September 20, 2008).
1111:Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
627:2005 warrantless surveillance scandal
150:Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
7:
1794:(1): 265–316 – via HeinOnline.
1379:
1377:
1375:
1340:"AT&T Whistle-Blower's Evidence"
1027:The EFF appealed this ruling to the
1940:United States class action case law
1454:Kravets, David (January 22, 2010).
1201:Litigation over global surveillance
1081:rejected the government's claim of
1077:In July 2013, District Court Judge
1668:Volz, Dustin (February 10, 2015).
1566:McCullagh, Declan (July 8, 2013).
1271:Aims To Stop Illegal Surveillance"
1015:. The case was first heard at the
25:
1903:"Timeline of NSA Domestic Spying"
1873:: 107–117 – via HeinOnline.
1744:Jewel v. National Security Agency
1689:Jewel v. National Security Agency
1550:Jewel v. National Security Agency
1438:Jewel v. National Security Agency
1311:Bamford, James (March 15, 2012).
1233:Jewel v. National Security Agency
1165:Jewel v. National Security Agency
1055:Subsequent District Court actions
966:warrantless wiretapping operation
921:Jewel v. National Security Agency
185:Map of global NSA data collection
32:Jewel v. National Security Agency
1410:Kravets, David (July 15, 2009).
1089:process that in turn required a
872:
860:
841:
829:
817:
805:
785:
775:
765:
755:
745:
735:
725:
324:President's Surveillance Program
178:
164:
1945:2010 in United States case law
1920:United States privacy case law
1854:: 8–20 – via HeinOnline.
1766:Electronic Frontier Foundation
1389:Electronic Frontier Foundation
1029:Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
1000:Electronic Frontier Foundation
938:Electronic Frontier Foundation
329:Terrorist Surveillance Program
1:
1925:Privacy of telecommunications
1824:10.5325/jinfopoli.8.2018.0005
1811:Journal of Information Policy
1760:Cohn, Cindy (June 13, 2022).
1482:Jeralyn (December 29, 2011).
1072:revelations by Edward Snowden
508:Senate Intelligence Committee
1955:Mass surveillance litigation
1805:Cramer, Benjamin W. (2018).
1649:"Court upholds NSA snooping"
1456:"Judge Tosses NSA Spy Cases"
994:Initial District Court case
485:FISA Amendments Act of 2008
480:Protect America Act of 2007
319:Total Information Awareness
1971:
1748:D.C. No. 4:08-cv-04373-JSW
282:Tailored Access Operations
655:Surveillance of reporters
513:National Security Council
148:
94:
36:
1950:National Security Agency
1163:The ultimate outcome of
1104:case and on its general
975:National Security Agency
942:National Security Agency
171:National Security Agency
1732:Case No. 08-CV-4373-JSW
1693:Case No. 08-CV-4373-JSW
1635:Case No. 08-CV-4373-JSW
1622:Case No. 08-CV-4373-JSW
1609:Case No. 08-CV-4373-JSW
1083:state secrets privilege
1045:state secrets privilege
1013:state secrets privilege
1867:Yale Law Journal Forum
1848:Yale Law Journal Forum
670:Insider Threat Program
1522:(December 24, 2013).
1059:In the meantime, NSA
475:Homeland Security Act
369:Databases, tools etc.
1035:Circuit court ruling
1004:class action lawsuit
926:class action lawsuit
665:UN diplomatic spying
121:Michael Daly Hawkins
1898:page at EFF website
1529:The Washington Post
1195:Hepting v. AT&T
977:(NSA) to install a
536:Hepting v. AT&T
455:Privacy Act of 1974
233:Upstream collection
139:M. Margaret McKeown
125:M. Margaret McKeown
1835:– via JSTOR.
1788:Belmont Law Review
1594:The New York Times
1556:(N.D. Cal., 2013).
1554:965 F.Supp.2d 1090
1444:(N.D. Cal., 2010).
1298:The New York Times
1147:U.S. Supreme Court
1002:(EFF) initiated a
989:Litigation history
928:argued before the
546:Clapper v. Amnesty
421:GCHQ collaboration
415:BOUNDLESSINFORMANT
1273:. Digital Journal
1239:(9th Cir., 2011).
1118:restraining order
1106:national security
1068:mass surveillance
917:
916:
159:
158:
77:December 29, 2011
16:(Redirected from
1962:
1906:
1875:
1874:
1862:
1856:
1855:
1843:
1837:
1836:
1826:
1802:
1796:
1795:
1783:
1777:
1776:
1774:
1772:
1757:
1751:
1741:
1735:
1728:
1722:
1721:
1719:
1717:
1702:
1696:
1686:
1680:
1679:
1675:National Journal
1665:
1659:
1658:
1644:
1638:
1631:
1625:
1618:
1612:
1605:
1599:
1598:
1584:
1578:
1577:
1563:
1557:
1547:
1541:
1540:
1538:
1536:
1516:
1510:
1509:
1502:
1496:
1495:
1493:
1491:
1479:
1473:
1472:
1470:
1468:
1451:
1445:
1435:
1429:
1428:
1426:
1424:
1407:
1401:
1400:
1398:
1396:
1381:
1370:
1369:
1363:
1355:
1353:
1351:
1336:
1330:
1329:
1327:
1325:
1308:
1302:
1301:
1289:
1283:
1282:
1280:
1278:
1262:
1256:
1253:Case No. 08-4373
1246:
1240:
1230:
1169:Fourth Amendment
1095:Fourth Amendment
954:Fourth Amendment
944:(NSA) without a
909:
902:
895:
877:
876:
865:
864:
846:
845:
834:
833:
822:
821:
810:
809:
789:
779:
769:
759:
749:
739:
729:
561:Wikimedia v. NSA
551:Klayman v. Obama
450:Safe Streets Act
182:
168:
161:
154:Fourth Amendment
108:Court membership
41:
29:
21:
1970:
1969:
1965:
1964:
1963:
1961:
1960:
1959:
1910:
1909:
1901:
1884:
1879:
1878:
1864:
1863:
1859:
1845:
1844:
1840:
1804:
1803:
1799:
1785:
1784:
1780:
1770:
1768:
1759:
1758:
1754:
1742:
1738:
1729:
1725:
1715:
1713:
1704:
1703:
1699:
1687:
1683:
1667:
1666:
1662:
1646:
1645:
1641:
1632:
1628:
1619:
1615:
1606:
1602:
1586:
1585:
1581:
1565:
1564:
1560:
1548:
1544:
1534:
1532:
1518:
1517:
1513:
1504:
1503:
1499:
1489:
1487:
1481:
1480:
1476:
1466:
1464:
1453:
1452:
1448:
1436:
1432:
1422:
1420:
1409:
1408:
1404:
1394:
1392:
1383:
1382:
1373:
1356:
1349:
1347:
1338:
1337:
1333:
1323:
1321:
1310:
1309:
1305:
1291:
1290:
1286:
1276:
1274:
1264:
1263:
1259:
1247:
1243:
1231:
1224:
1219:
1190:
1161:
1057:
1037:
996:
991:
962:
913:
884:
883:
871:
859:
840:
828:
816:
804:
716:
708:
707:
693:
685:
684:
645:
637:
636:
622:
614:
613:
579:
571:
570:
556:ACLU v. Clapper
526:
518:
517:
498:
490:
489:
445:
437:
436:
196:
188:
169:
117:Harry Pregerson
101:personal injury
69:August 31, 2011
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1968:
1966:
1958:
1957:
1952:
1947:
1942:
1937:
1932:
1927:
1922:
1912:
1911:
1908:
1907:
1899:
1891:
1890:at EFF website
1888:Complaint copy
1883:
1882:External links
1880:
1877:
1876:
1857:
1838:
1797:
1778:
1752:
1736:
1723:
1712:. May 23, 2017
1697:
1681:
1660:
1639:
1626:
1613:
1600:
1579:
1558:
1542:
1520:Barton Gellman
1511:
1497:
1486:. talkleft.com
1474:
1446:
1442:2010 WL 235075
1430:
1402:
1391:. July 1, 2011
1385:"Jewel v. NSA"
1371:
1331:
1303:
1284:
1257:
1241:
1221:
1220:
1218:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1208:
1203:
1198:
1189:
1186:
1160:
1157:
1074:in June 2013.
1064:William Binney
1056:
1053:
1036:
1033:
995:
992:
990:
987:
961:
958:
915:
914:
912:
911:
904:
897:
889:
886:
885:
882:
881:
869:
856:
855:
851:
850:
838:
826:
814:
801:
800:
794:
793:
783:
773:
763:
753:
743:
733:
722:
721:
717:
714:
713:
710:
709:
706:
705:
700:
694:
691:
690:
687:
686:
683:
682:
677:
672:
667:
662:
657:
652:
646:
643:
642:
639:
638:
635:
634:
629:
623:
620:
619:
616:
615:
612:
611:
609:Edward Snowden
606:
601:
596:
591:
586:
584:William Binney
580:
578:Whistleblowers
577:
576:
573:
572:
569:
568:
563:
558:
553:
548:
543:
538:
533:
527:
524:
523:
520:
519:
516:
515:
510:
505:
499:
496:
495:
492:
491:
488:
487:
482:
477:
472:
467:
462:
457:
452:
446:
443:
442:
439:
438:
435:
434:
429:
423:
422:
418:
417:
412:
407:
402:
397:
392:
387:
382:
377:
371:
370:
366:
365:
360:
355:
350:
345:
339:
338:
334:
333:
332:
331:
321:
316:
311:
306:
301:
296:
290:
289:
285:
284:
278:
277:
273:
272:
266:
265:
261:
260:
255:
250:
245:
240:
235:
229:
228:
224:
223:
218:
213:
208:
202:
201:
197:
194:
193:
190:
189:
183:
175:
174:
157:
156:
146:
145:
141:
140:
137:
133:
132:
128:
127:
114:
113:Judges sitting
110:
109:
105:
104:
92:
91:
87:
86:
83:
79:
78:
75:
71:
70:
67:
63:
62:
57:
56:Full case name
53:
52:
47:
43:
42:
34:
33:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1967:
1956:
1953:
1951:
1948:
1946:
1943:
1941:
1938:
1936:
1933:
1931:
1928:
1926:
1923:
1921:
1918:
1917:
1915:
1904:
1900:
1897:
1896:
1892:
1889:
1886:
1885:
1881:
1872:
1868:
1861:
1858:
1853:
1849:
1842:
1839:
1834:
1830:
1825:
1820:
1816:
1812:
1808:
1801:
1798:
1793:
1789:
1782:
1779:
1767:
1763:
1756:
1753:
1749:
1745:
1740:
1737:
1733:
1727:
1724:
1711:
1707:
1701:
1698:
1694:
1690:
1685:
1682:
1677:
1676:
1671:
1664:
1661:
1656:
1655:
1650:
1643:
1640:
1636:
1630:
1627:
1623:
1617:
1614:
1610:
1604:
1601:
1596:
1595:
1590:
1583:
1580:
1575:
1574:
1569:
1562:
1559:
1555:
1551:
1546:
1543:
1531:
1530:
1525:
1521:
1515:
1512:
1507:
1501:
1498:
1485:
1478:
1475:
1463:
1462:
1457:
1450:
1447:
1443:
1439:
1434:
1431:
1419:
1418:
1413:
1406:
1403:
1390:
1386:
1380:
1378:
1376:
1372:
1367:
1361:
1360:cite magazine
1345:
1341:
1335:
1332:
1320:
1319:
1314:
1307:
1304:
1299:
1295:
1288:
1285:
1272:
1270:
1261:
1258:
1254:
1250:
1245:
1242:
1238:
1237:673 F. 3d 902
1234:
1229:
1227:
1223:
1216:
1212:
1209:
1207:
1204:
1202:
1199:
1197:
1196:
1192:
1191:
1187:
1185:
1183:
1179:
1175:
1170:
1166:
1158:
1156:
1154:
1153:
1148:
1142:
1138:
1136:
1130:
1128:
1123:
1119:
1114:
1112:
1107:
1103:
1098:
1096:
1092:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1079:Jeffrey White
1075:
1073:
1069:
1065:
1062:
1061:whistleblower
1054:
1052:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1034:
1032:
1030:
1025:
1022:
1021:Vaughn Walker
1018:
1014:
1010:
1005:
1001:
998:In 2008, the
993:
988:
986:
984:
980:
976:
972:
967:
959:
957:
955:
951:
947:
943:
939:
935:
931:
927:
923:
922:
910:
905:
903:
898:
896:
891:
890:
888:
887:
880:
875:
870:
868:
863:
858:
857:
853:
852:
849:
844:
839:
837:
832:
827:
825:
820:
815:
813:
808:
803:
802:
799:
796:
795:
792:
788:
784:
782:
778:
774:
772:
768:
764:
762:
758:
754:
752:
748:
744:
742:
738:
734:
732:
728:
724:
723:
720:United States
719:
718:
715:Collaboration
712:
711:
704:
701:
699:
696:
695:
689:
688:
681:
678:
676:
673:
671:
668:
666:
663:
661:
660:Mail tracking
658:
656:
653:
651:
648:
647:
641:
640:
633:
630:
628:
625:
624:
618:
617:
610:
607:
605:
602:
600:
597:
595:
592:
590:
587:
585:
582:
581:
575:
574:
567:
564:
562:
559:
557:
554:
552:
549:
547:
544:
542:
539:
537:
534:
532:
529:
528:
522:
521:
514:
511:
509:
506:
504:
501:
500:
494:
493:
486:
483:
481:
478:
476:
473:
471:
468:
466:
463:
461:
458:
456:
453:
451:
448:
447:
441:
440:
433:
430:
428:
425:
424:
420:
419:
416:
413:
411:
408:
406:
403:
401:
398:
396:
393:
391:
388:
386:
383:
381:
378:
376:
373:
372:
368:
367:
364:
361:
359:
356:
354:
351:
349:
346:
344:
341:
340:
336:
335:
330:
327:
326:
325:
322:
320:
317:
315:
312:
310:
307:
305:
302:
300:
297:
295:
292:
291:
287:
286:
283:
280:
279:
275:
274:
271:
268:
267:
263:
262:
259:
256:
254:
251:
249:
246:
244:
241:
239:
236:
234:
231:
230:
226:
225:
222:
219:
217:
214:
212:
209:
207:
204:
203:
199:
198:
192:
191:
186:
181:
177:
176:
172:
167:
162:
155:
151:
147:
142:
138:
134:
131:Case opinions
129:
126:
122:
118:
115:
111:
106:
102:
98:
93:
88:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
64:
61:
58:
54:
51:
48:
44:
40:
35:
30:
27:
19:
1895:Jewel v. NSA
1894:
1870:
1866:
1860:
1851:
1847:
1841:
1814:
1810:
1800:
1791:
1787:
1781:
1769:. Retrieved
1765:
1755:
1743:
1739:
1726:
1714:. Retrieved
1709:
1700:
1688:
1684:
1673:
1663:
1652:
1642:
1629:
1616:
1603:
1592:
1582:
1571:
1561:
1549:
1545:
1535:December 25,
1533:. Retrieved
1527:
1514:
1500:
1490:December 30,
1488:. Retrieved
1477:
1467:December 30,
1465:. Retrieved
1459:
1449:
1437:
1433:
1423:December 30,
1421:. Retrieved
1415:
1405:
1395:November 21,
1393:. Retrieved
1388:
1350:February 27,
1348:. Retrieved
1343:
1334:
1322:. Retrieved
1316:
1306:
1297:
1287:
1277:December 30,
1275:. Retrieved
1269:Jewel v. NSA
1268:
1260:
1249:Jewel v. NSA
1248:
1244:
1232:
1193:
1181:
1164:
1162:
1150:
1143:
1139:
1131:
1121:
1115:
1101:
1099:
1076:
1058:
1038:
1026:
997:
979:NarusInsight
963:
920:
919:
918:
589:Thomas Drake
566:US v. Moalin
541:Jewel v. NSA
497:Institutions
395:TRAFFICTHIEF
173:surveillance
144:Laws applied
85:673 F.3d 902
59:
26:
18:Jewel v. NSA
1716:January 23,
1127:Section 702
936:, filed by
621:Publication
599:Thomas Tamm
531:ACLU v. NSA
470:Patriot Act
444:Legislation
304:Trailblazer
1914:Categories
1217:References
1152:certiorari
971:Mark Klein
960:Background
594:Mark Klein
337:Since 2007
309:Turbulence
288:Since 2001
276:Since 1998
264:Since 1990
253:ThinThread
227:Since 1978
1833:158194048
1324:April 23,
1211:Room 641A
983:Room 641A
798:Five Eyes
650:Cablegate
604:Russ Tice
405:XKeyscore
385:Main Core
353:Stateroom
299:STORMBREW
270:RAMPART-A
248:Main Core
1817:: 5–33.
1771:June 18,
1654:The Hill
1188:See also
1178:Catch-22
1174:standing
1135:standing
1041:remanded
1019:. Judge
1009:standing
932:and the
741:CYBERCOM
703:Metadata
692:Concepts
525:Lawsuits
427:MUSCULAR
400:DISHFIRE
348:Dropmire
314:Genoa II
243:FAIRVIEW
216:SHAMROCK
200:Pre-1978
195:Programs
136:Majority
97:standing
82:Citation
1750:(2021).
1734:, 2019.
1710:eff.org
1695:, 2017.
1637:, 2014.
1624:, 2014.
1611:, 2014.
1255:, 2008.
1091:warrant
950:dragnet
946:warrant
644:Related
432:Tempora
410:ICREACH
390:MAINWAY
375:PINWALE
358:Bullrun
294:OAKSTAR
238:BLARNEY
211:MINARET
206:ECHELON
90:Holding
74:Decided
1831:
1159:Impact
1087:search
698:SIGINT
380:MARINA
363:MYSTIC
221:PROMIS
66:Argued
1829:S2CID
1461:Wired
1417:Wired
1344:Wired
1318:Wired
1182:Jewel
1122:Jewel
1102:Jewel
854:Other
343:PRISM
258:Genoa
46:Court
1773:2022
1718:2018
1573:CNET
1537:2013
1492:2011
1469:2011
1425:2011
1397:2022
1366:link
1352:2009
1326:2012
1279:2011
867:DGSE
848:GCSB
824:GCHQ
812:CSEC
503:FISC
465:ECPA
460:FISA
123:and
99:and
1871:126
1852:126
1819:doi
879:BND
836:ASD
791:IAO
781:DHS
771:CIA
761:FBI
751:DOJ
731:CSS
1916::
1869:.
1850:.
1827:.
1813:.
1809:.
1790:.
1764:.
1708:.
1672:.
1651:.
1591:.
1570:.
1552:,
1526:.
1458:.
1440:,
1414:.
1387:.
1374:^
1362:}}
1358:{{
1342:.
1315:.
1296:.
1235:,
1225:^
1155:.
1097:.
1031:.
956:.
152:,
119:,
1821::
1815:8
1792:9
1775:.
1720:.
1678:.
1657:.
1597:.
1576:.
1539:.
1494:.
1471:.
1427:.
1399:.
1368:)
1354:.
1328:.
1300:.
1281:.
1267:"
908:e
901:t
894:v
103:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
