[HN Gopher] New Super Secret Surveillance Court Covering Old Sup...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       New Super Secret Surveillance Court Covering Old Super Secret
       Surveillance Court
        
       Author : rntn
       Score  : 78 points
       Date   : 2024-02-02 19:32 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.techdirt.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.techdirt.com)
        
       | instagib wrote:
       | There's always another secrecy group that oversees the other and
       | then eventually is overseen by the joint chiefs, president, or
       | some other un-named official.
        
         | strangattractor wrote:
         | This is why we need a Super Secret Journalism Organization to
         | monitor and report on the other Super Secret groups.
        
           | electric_mayhem wrote:
           | Ed and Chelsea and Juilan probably have some thoughts on how
           | that works out.
        
       | ciabattabread wrote:
       | This sounds like an executive tribunal. What is the appeals
       | process, and which real federal court does it end up in?
        
         | zerocrates wrote:
         | I imagine that since this is an executive-branch "court," the
         | theoretical recourse would be something like the Administrative
         | Procedure Act's general provision for challenging "agency
         | action." Or otherwise, directly filing suit as before.
         | 
         | Regardless of the theoretical vehicle, you'd have the same
         | problems in the way of success as prior attempts in the courts
         | have had, where you can't get the information needed to have
         | your claim survive in the first place.
        
       | joedevon wrote:
       | You have been on double secret probation
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Can we just use the source article instead of this tech..dirt:
       | 
       | https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/17/inside-bidens-secre...
        
       | GoodUser77 wrote:
       | As usually
        
       | vjulian wrote:
       | It irritates to no end when US presidents are not only falsely
       | attributed to government actions but falsely portrayed, even
       | thinly, as masterminding those related plans. Over the course of
       | news cycles it paints the picture of a superman not unlike the
       | absurd hyperbole in descriptions of North Korea's Dear Leader. In
       | the US, I am not sure whether it can be attributed to laziness or
       | to the calculus of the news establishment, but regardless it is
       | poor journalism.
        
         | oooyay wrote:
         | It's an election year. Party constituents eat polarizing
         | rhetoric and outlandish takes like it's a breakfast bar.
         | Journalists are happy to stock that bar.
         | 
         | fwiw, it wasn't Biden that created the court it was Merrick
         | Garland: https://www.justice.gov/opcl/redress-data-protection-
         | review-...
         | 
         | Also, not exactly a secret given that it had a PR release and
         | the judges are known. Maybe the secret part is getting in front
         | of them.
        
           | smcin wrote:
           | The court's functioning is absolutely still a secret to its
           | plaintiffs [EU residents]; its location is a secret, the DOJ
           | refuses to say if it has taken a case yet, or when it will.
           | [That implies it has not published any rulings, or maybe it
           | will never publish rulings]. Its decisions will also be kept
           | a secret, from both the EU residents petitioning the court
           | and the federal agencies tasked with following the law.
           | Plaintiffs [EU-residents] are not allowed to appear in person
           | [not even remotely by Zoom, it sounds like?] and are
           | represented by a special advocate, appointed by the U.S.
           | Attorney General.
           | 
           | I can't see US citizens being told to just trust a secret
           | European court whose deliberations aren't known, yet affects
           | their lives, visas, travels, finances etc.
           | 
           | "Maybe the secret part is getting in front of them." No, they
           | already stated that the EU plaintiffs don't have the right to
           | appear before the court. So they don't get in front of them.
           | 
           | On the "Animal House" taxonomy of double-secret, it's up
           | there.
        
             | oooyay wrote:
             | I think your points are fair and I largely agree with you,
             | but I'd probably use the word "opaque" rather than
             | secretive. Sometimes opaque systems _do_ serve a purpose,
             | other times they 're an excuse to undermine rights and
             | liberties. This court deals entirely in classified
             | information (from its mandate) and only produces classified
             | rulings. I linked both of the sources (.gov websites) in
             | another comment. Whether or not that's good enough to
             | remain opaque I don't know. I do know that I'm not a fan of
             | any surveillance state and I'm not confident in the ability
             | of intergovernment watchdogs to spot violations, even gross
             | ones.
        
           | leereeves wrote:
           | > fwiw, it wasn't Biden that created the court it was Merrick
           | Garland
           | 
           | But Merrick Garland is a Biden appointee. Don't you think
           | leaders should be held accountable for the actions of their
           | administration?
           | 
           | Of course, as vjulian points out, they aren't masterminding
           | everything that their subordinates do, but they do choose who
           | to appoint and have the power to reverse anything they
           | disapprove of once they learn about it.
        
             | oooyay wrote:
             | > Don't you think leaders should be held accountable for
             | the actions of their administration?
             | 
             | Color me cynical, but people only mutter this when it's
             | someone on the other team. So, in general do I think we
             | should follow that principle? Yes. Do I think people widely
             | believe that enough to hold their own self-interest-
             | adjacent parties accountable? Certainly not.
             | 
             | If you want to be _very_ picky, the rule Mr Garland
             | invented was in response to a Biden executive order [1]
             | [2]. The executive order is long, but section 3 is pretty
             | succinct and clear. If Mr Garland implemented an opaque
             | system then I can predict one of two scenarios occurred,
             | maybe both:
             | 
             | 1. All of the information the court receives is classified
             | and should never have been leaked in the first place, so no
             | one should know. That means the way someone _does_ know is
             | because of the watchdogs inside the intelligence community.
             | 
             | 2. Mr Garland is openly defying the President through
             | process and appeasing someone (maybe the intelligence
             | community).
             | 
             | 1: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/10/14/202
             | 2-22...
             | 
             | 2: https://www.state.gov/executive-order-14086-policy-and-
             | proce...
        
         | smcin wrote:
         | Your comment is related to the Politico articled cited, not the
         | actual techdirt article, right? (the techdirt article has 0
         | named mentions of Biden or Obama, and only one of 'former Trump
         | campaign adviser Carter Page').
         | 
         | Yeah, Politico's use of "Biden's court... Biden's proposal" is
         | annoyingly lazy DC shorthand for "the Biden-era
         | DOJ/DHS/FTC/etc."
        
           | vjulian wrote:
           | Correct. I saw that someone had linked the original article
           | and therefore skipped directly there.
        
       | claytongulick wrote:
       | Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? [1]
       | 
       | Who watches the watchmen?
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custodiet_ipsos_custodes%...
        
       | flipbrad wrote:
       | The fact that Eric Holder is a judge on this new court - while
       | also working at Covington & Burling [1], a law firm actively
       | involved in helping large companies defend these very same
       | transatlantic data flows [2] - tells you all you need to know
       | about the new court. Ditto his fellow judge, Rajesh De, who used
       | to be the NSA's top judge.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.cov.com/en/professionals/h/eric-holder
       | 
       | [2] https://www.cov.com/en/news-and-
       | insights/news/2019/07/coving...
        
       | doublerabbit wrote:
       | Can we just get to the point and admit the world, all countries
       | are corrupt and that evil is the entity that's in control?
       | 
       | You can no longer trust anything or anyone. If you speak out your
       | shot, reprimanded or gagged.
       | 
       | Regardless to who owns who's data it will always be misused,
       | abused or used for something.
       | 
       | And as data is now a commodity that can be sold to anyone and the
       | sci-fi dystopian future is already one. There is no freedom nor
       | freedom to speech, with the ability that we can reach space on a
       | commercial level with satellites, fear for the worse.
       | 
       | The internet is a failure. It brings usefulness but sure isn't
       | used for it; not anymore at least.
       | 
       | Prove me wrong, but with the masses lapping up social media,
       | you'll going to have a hard time proving it. My two cents.
        
       | gjsman-1000 wrote:
       | I think it should be a basic human right that any citizen of a
       | country should be permitted to have a complete list of courts,
       | their locations, their judges, and their claims to authority.
        
       | declan_roberts wrote:
       | What's been happening with these FISA courts is disgusting. They
       | really have no shame.
       | 
       | The only reason we know about their spying against the Trump
       | campaign is because people hate Trump and they thought nobody
       | would care.
       | 
       | We know about Trump but who else are they spying on that we
       | haven't learned about yet?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-02 23:00 UTC)