U.S. judge upholds NSA phone surveillance program


#1

news.yahoo.com/u-judge-says-nsa-phone-data-program-lawful-163733246.html

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A U.S. judge ruled the National Security Agency’s program that collects records of millions of Americans’ phone calls is lawful, rejecting a challenge by the American Civil Liberties Union to the controversial counter-terrorism program.


#2

I always find it interesting when two different courts render opposing opinions on an issue… Should be interesting to see how this plays out.


#3

well, I believe the first fed judges ruling trumps this, as it was first. I dont find it strange that the govt managed to find a judge to agree with them though, after all, they are the govt…cannot get anymore corrupt!

But Im sure the fed govt will MAKE SURE they get whatever they ask for. I honestly cannot recall a case where they did not…?


#4

America has become such a twisted perverted land, that most people couldn’t care less that we’ve become one of the worst spy states in history.


#5

Don’t worry America, you don’t need freedom, liberty or any of that nonsense, at least you have easy access to abortion, free contraception and gays can marry! :rolleyes:


#6

If each of the appellate courts uphold each judge’s ruling; the SCOTUS will almost assuredly hear the cases.


#7

I’m sure they will end up hearing it. If I’m not mistaken, the administration can actually seek guidance from the Supreme Court without a case going before them, if they are willing to accept the answer… but if they are determined already that it’s legal, then they have to actually argue the case vs asking for guidance. I may be mistaken on that though.


#8

This infuriates me. I honestly feel like we are living in an authoritarian police state.


#9

How is this even legal? I never knew that if you didnt like the ruling from one judge, you could just ‘shop’ around for another judge, that is willing to side with you…does this mean anyone who has been convicted of crimes can also shop around, and they may find a judge who disagrees with the prosecution?

Regarding the above post…you are right the US has been a literal police state for years now.


#10

They were different cases being brought forward by different people in different parts of the country. Nobody shopped around for a judge to rule in their favor.

The Federal Court System is divided into different “districts” and “circuits” and similar cases can be reviewed in different ones. When a federal judge rules, their jurisdiction is for that district only. A judge in another district in the same circuit may agree in another similar case with the decision that the previous judge made or not. If they don’t agree; they can rule differently. In either case if the party that lost the case does not agree with the decision; they can go to the appellate court in that circuit. The appellate court is above the district courts for that circuit (see map below.) The appellate court in that circuit will then rule to uphold the judge’s decision or over turn it. Again, the decision only has jurisdiction within that circuit. Other appellate courts, in other circuits, may agree or disagree in similar cases.

Eventually; if two appellate courts disagree on similar cases; the cases go to the US Supreme court for a decision. The decisions of the US Supreme court are final and would be in force for the entire United States.

This process is a good one. We don’t want just one judge making a decision that would affect all of the United States.

A map of federal districts and circuits is here:
uscourts.gov/uscourts/images/CircuitMap.pdf


#11

Judge shopping or forum shopping is a common practice in state and federal courts. Some jurisdictions are trying to crack down on the practice.

Manhattan Federal Court Changes Rules On Judge Shopping


#12

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.