Obama admin channels Bush in attempt to weaken search protections

[jgraz]

Following Bush-era argument, Obama attorneys push to weaken search protections

Even though a Bush-era request to conduct blanket searches of computer files was rebuked by judges, the Obama administration is now pushing to have the decision reversed, according to court documents filed the week of Thanksgiving.

U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan, an Obama appointee, and twenty other government attorneys submitted a brief to the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals, making a very extraordinary request.

Federal prosecutors went too far when they seized the drug test results of 104 pro baseball players, according to a 9-2 "en banc" panel decision in August by the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals. The ruling included guidelines for computer search conduct designed to protect Fourth Amendment privacy rights, in the style of Miranda rights.

<snip>

During the slow news week of Thanksgiving the Obama administration took action, seeking to reverse the 3-month old decision. Wired Magazine and libertarians had applauded the dramatic reductions to the government's search-and-seizure powers, but the government now claims "computer searches have ground to a complete halt" in some districts.

http://rawstory.com/2009/11/obama-reversal-computer-privacy-ruling

[Why Syzygy]

1. No words. nt

[LooseWilly]

2. I so want to be surprised...

somehow I just ain't.

[DJ13]

3. So much for electing a "Constitutional scholar" for President

[QC]

4. But he's so fetching in his swimsuit! n/t

[LooseWilly]

5. It's his superlative constitution...

[QC]

6. I just put a new picture of him in my locker!

It's so dreamy that I hardly ever think about all those lost constitutional protections anymore.

[dionysus]

8. you really get off on sneering disdain don't you?

[FrenchieCat]

7. I read the story.

Let the case go to the Supreme Court.
That's probably a good thing.

The Government is arguing how this affects cases against Sexual Predators,
and the seizing of their computers.

This appears to be interesting,
but I don't know enough about it to comment further.

Post more on this when you find anything more.

Thanks for the link!

[uponit7771]

9. COME ON!!! Is this ANOTHER misleading print by raw story that dosen't tell the caveats?!!?!?!

How fuckin many of these have we had posted on DU over the past year?!!?

Does ANYONE understand that these post and stories have lost credibility cause after a couple of minutes of reading there are ALWAYS caveats that diffuse the actions by the Obama admin?!

Thx

[jgraz]

10. OK, in your opinion, what caveats "diffuse" the actions by Obama?

[jgraz]

11. * cricket noise * cricket noise * cricket noise * cricket noise *

I thought so.

[VMI Dem]

12. Deep google search in progress.

Have patience.

[jgraz]

13. Suuuure it is...

:D

[ohheckyeah]

14. Does this make sense?

The government is pointing to a nauseating rape case to argue investigators are now the ones in handcuffs. "Agents did not obtain a warrant to search the suspects' computers," the government wrote, "because of concerns that any evidence discovered about other potential victims could not be disclosed by the filter team."

That makes no sense to me. So, did the court refuse the agents a warrant or did the agents just not seek a warrant? If there was a filter team that would indicate they would only divulge the information on the victim covered by the search warrant.