Former Spy Boss Says Judge ‘Not in Good Position’ to Pronounce on NSA Program

'Likely unconstitutional' ruling by Judge Richard Leon is disputed and downplayed

  • Share
  • Read Later

A federal judge who ruled that the National Security Agency’s (NSA) surveillance of U.S. telephone records was likely unconstitutional is “not in a good position” to evaluate the effectiveness of the program, a former NSA director says.

U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon said Monday that there was little evidence that the collection of phone metadata “actually stopped an imminent terrorist attack.”

But onetime NSA chief Michael Hayden disputed the judge’s statement, according to Associated Press. “[Leon] makes a judgment that the government was not able to show that this stopped an imminent terrorist attack. That’s not the only metric,” Hayden said, arguing that metadata helped the NSA track and understand terrorist behavior.

The significance of Leon’s ruling was also downplayed by Hayden, who said that the finding would only apply to one case — that brought by lawyer Larry Klayman and Charles Strange, the father of a technician who worked for the NSA when he was killed in Afghanistan in 2011. The two men had sought an injunction against the collection of their phone records.

Professor Robert F. Turner of the University of Virginia’s Center for National Security Law said Leon’s decision was likely to be reversed on appeal. The collection of metadata had already been found constitutional by the Supreme Court, he said.

However,  Stephen Vladeck, an expert in security law at the American University, hailed the judgement as “important symbolically in dispelling the invincibility of the metadata program.”

Klayman called the ruling “great” and “correct.” He said it was the first time “in a long time that a court has stepped in to prevent the tyranny of the other two branches of government.”

[AP]

5 comments
zakkpln
zakkpln

the terrorists being you

JohnDavidDeatherage
JohnDavidDeatherage

Yes, but Federal Judge Leon is in the perfect position to render whether the NSA's program passes Constitutional muster. The effectiveness of the program is irrelevant if it violates the Constitution. 

PANATAG
PANATAG

@EraNeu 13 Mar"I don't measure a man's success by how high he climbs but how high he

bounces when he hits bottom." - George Patton

say’s new chief

S_Deemer
S_Deemer

@SallySnyder  Thanks for the link to the talking points. There existence is not controversial — this is what any large entity does to project its message — or limited to the Obama administration, but the content is in places laughable.


"...under FISA, in order to target the content of a US person's communication anywhere in the world, NSA requires a finding of probable cause under a specific court order." Very subtle wording here, with the key word being "content."  A "National Security Letter," which is independent of legal courts, is all that is required. Furthermore, a NSL contains a clause that forbids the recipient from revealing the contents of the NSL, or even its receipt.

"Compliance at the NSA is robust and rigorous." The record shows that the NSA has broken privacy rules thousands of times per year.

"And our allies have benefited from these lawfully operated programs just as we have." Ask Angela Merkel.

ROTFLMAO.