September 6, 2007 — (WEB HOST INDUSTRY REVIEW) — A US federal judge has ruled against certain parts of the revised USA Patriot Act on Thursday saying that investigators must have court approval before ordering Internet service providers to turn over records without telling their customers.
According to the Globe and Mail, US District Judge Victor Marrero says the rewritten Patriot Act goes against important constitutional principles of checks and balances and separation of powers and that the revised law reflects Congress’ attempt to infringe upon the court system’s designated role under the Constitution. He also says that national security letters from the FBI or any other government orders must go further to protect people by passing through a review and approval process by the judicial system before being handed out.
The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the initial version of the Patriot Act, saying that it enabled the FBI to demand records without the kind of court order required for other government searches. It also gave the FBI the authority to control speech and decide whether an ISP had to remain silent or whether it could reveal to customers it was turning over records to authorities.
In 2004, the judge ruling on the initial version of the Patriot Act said national security letters from the FBI violated the Constitution because they amounted to unreasonable search and seizure of customer records and violated free speech. Congress revised the Patriot Act in 2005 and Marrero was directed to review the law’s constitutionality a second time.
About theWHIR.com
Since 2000, The Web Host Industry Review has made a name for itself as the foremost authority of the Web hosting industry providing reliable, insightful and comprehensive news, interviews and resources to the hosting community. TheWHIR is an iNET Interactive property. For more information on iNET Interactive, visit http://www.inetinteractive.com
No related posts.
