Lawmakers Look To Stop the Feds From Secretly Buying Your Private Data

[Disir]

And so a group of privacy-minded lawmakers—including Sens. Rand Paul (R–Ky.), Ron Wyden (D–Ore.), Patrick Leahy (D–Vt.), and Mike Lee (R–Utah)—has introduced The Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act. The bill prohibits federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies from attempting to bypass court order requirements by purchasing private citizen tech data from brokers or any third-party company that may have legitimately or illegitimately obtained the information.

​

In the past two years, we've seen the feds make this end run several times. In February 2020, the Wall Street Journal revealed the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement purchased a commercial database full of cellphone tracking data (the very type of information the Supreme Court ruled was private) for immigration enforcement purposes. At the time, a Customs and Border Protection spokesperson said that while the database included tracking information, this was somehow different from the Supreme Court case because it didn't involve the use of cell towers to aid in the tracking, an argument that deliberately ignores the part of the decision that says that we have an expectation of privacy for records of our physical movements, regardless of the means used to access those records.

Lawmakers Look To Stop the Feds From Secretly Buying Your Private Data

A bipartisan group of lawmakers has introduced a bill to stop federal law enforcement from sidestepping citizens' privacy rights by…

reason.com

Sometimes I really dig Rand Paul. And it has bipartisan support. Not banned totally BUT federal law enforcement needs a court order.

 

[White 6]

And so a group of privacy-minded lawmakers—including Sens. Rand Paul (R–Ky.), Ron Wyden (D–Ore.), Patrick Leahy (D–Vt.), and Mike Lee (R–Utah)—has introduced The Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act. The bill prohibits federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies from attempting to bypass court order requirements by purchasing private citizen tech data from brokers or any third-party company that may have legitimately or illegitimately obtained the information.

​

In the past two years, we've seen the feds make this end run several times. In February 2020, the Wall Street Journal revealed the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement purchased a commercial database full of cellphone tracking data (the very type of information the Supreme Court ruled was private) for immigration enforcement purposes. At the time, a Customs and Border Protection spokesperson said that while the database included tracking information, this was somehow different from the Supreme Court case because it didn't involve the use of cell towers to aid in the tracking, an argument that deliberately ignores the part of the decision that says that we have an expectation of privacy for records of our physical movements, regardless of the means used to access those records.

Lawmakers Look To Stop the Feds From Secretly Buying Your Private Data

A bipartisan group of lawmakers has introduced a bill to stop federal law enforcement from sidestepping citizens' privacy rights by…

reason.com

Sometimes I really dig Rand Paul. And it has bipartisan support. Not banned totally BUT federal law enforcement needs a court order.

Rand is and irritant, but he is right about this.

 

[Disir]

And so a group of privacy-minded lawmakers—including Sens. Rand Paul (R–Ky.), Ron Wyden (D–Ore.), Patrick Leahy (D–Vt.), and Mike Lee (R–Utah)—has introduced The Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act. The bill prohibits federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies from attempting to bypass court order requirements by purchasing private citizen tech data from brokers or any third-party company that may have legitimately or illegitimately obtained the information.

​

In the past two years, we've seen the feds make this end run several times. In February 2020, the Wall Street Journal revealed the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement purchased a commercial database full of cellphone tracking data (the very type of information the Supreme Court ruled was private) for immigration enforcement purposes. At the time, a Customs and Border Protection spokesperson said that while the database included tracking information, this was somehow different from the Supreme Court case because it didn't involve the use of cell towers to aid in the tracking, an argument that deliberately ignores the part of the decision that says that we have an expectation of privacy for records of our physical movements, regardless of the means used to access those records.

Lawmakers Look To Stop the Feds From Secretly Buying Your Private Data

A bipartisan group of lawmakers has introduced a bill to stop federal law enforcement from sidestepping citizens' privacy rights by…

reason.com

Sometimes I really dig Rand Paul. And it has bipartisan support. Not banned totally BUT federal law enforcement needs a court order.

Rand is and irritant, but he is right about this.

He is a necessary irritant and one that the US desperately needs right about now.

 

[fncceo]

If the information exists, it will fall into the hands of those who want it Pass all the laws you like, it is inevitable.

 

[Disir]

If the information exists, it will fall into the hands of those who want it Pass all the laws you like, it is inevitable.

Must you suck out every teeny tiny smidge of idealism and spit it out like it's absolutely nothing?

 

[fncceo]

If the information exists, it will fall into the hands of those who want it Pass all the laws you like, it is inevitable.

Must you suck out every teeny tiny smidge of idealism and spit it out like it's absolutely nothing?

There is nothing wrong with idealism ... but you have to possess just the tiniest bit of realism as well. The time to be idealistic about privacy was decades ago. The fact is, that particular genie is now out of the bottle and it's not going back willingly.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

They require dirt to stay in power.

*****SMILE*****

 

[beagle9]

View attachment 482951

They require dirt to stay in power.

*****SMILE*****

That's why ole Satan is called the accuser of the brethren. He hoped that Job would falter, but he didn't... Now what was also revealed in that text is that ole Satan is in the dark when it comes to seeing what is to come, and knowing all that soon shall be, and especially so in relation to the supreme beings omnipotence and power of revelation.

This is why Godly people already know the outcomes of this play, because God reveals it within our wisdom's in which is given onto us by him for whom we do believe in. Although we are flesh, we are the wiser because we believe in the spirit, and we understand such things as truth.

 

[ColonelAngus]

The communists running our government wont let it happen.