PRISM

[Griff]

Ho hum. Another day another violation of the 4th Amendment.

[Lamplighter]

The Guardian
Glenn Greenwald
8/4/13

Members of Congress denied access to basic information about NSA

Documents provided by two House members demonstrate
how they are blocked from exercising any oversight over domestic surveillance
<snjp>
Two House members, GOP Rep. Morgan Griffith of Virginia and
Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida, have provided the Guardian
with numerous letters and emails documenting their persistent,
and unsuccessful, efforts to learn about NSA programs and relevant FISA court rulings.
<snjp>
Rep. Griffith requested information about the NSA from the House Intelligence Committee
six weeks ago, on June 25. He asked for "access to the classified FISA court order(s)
referenced on Meet the Press this past weekend": a reference to my raising with host David Gregory
the still-secret 2011 86-page ruling from the FISA court that found substantial parts
of NSA domestic spying to be in violation of the Fourth Amendment as well as governing surveillance statutes.

And then there is the question of Freedom of Information...

NBC News
Michael Isikoff
6/12/13
Secret court won't object to release of opinion on illegal surveillance

In a rare public ruling by the nation’s most secretive judicial body,
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ruled Wednesday that
it did not object to the release of a classified 86-page opinion concluding
that some of the U.S. government’s surveillance activities were unconstitutional.

The ruling, signed by the court’s chief judge, Reggie Walton, rejected
the Justice Department’s arguments that the secret national security court’s rules
prevented disclosure of the opinion. Instead, the court found that
because the document was in the possession of the Justice Department,
it was subject to release under the Freedom of Information Act.
<snip>
The EFF’s lawsuit was inspired by a July 20, 2012 letter from an aide to
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.,
that stated that “on at least one occasion,” the FISC held that “some collection”
carried out by the U.S. government under classified surveillance programs
“was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.”