Nevada ACLU likes federal court ruling against Patriot Act
508858
Nevada representatives of the American Civil Liberties Union are hailing a federal judge&#39;s ruling against part of the Patriot Act that the FBI used to get casinos and airlines to turn over records of thousands of Las Vegas visitors.
687898
A divided U.S. appeals court strikes down a lower court's ruling that a federal government wiretapping program is illegal.
269879
US News, In a blow to the Justice Department&#39;s post-Sept. 11 powers, US District Judge Victor Marrero on Wednesday struck down the provision of the Patriot Act that let the FBI gather phone and Web customer
633646
A federal judge in New York ruled Wednesday that a key component of the USA Patriot Act is unconstitutional because it allows the FBI to demand information from Internet service providers
219311
TUCSON, Ariz.  - A federal judge on Wednesday  lifted a block on a controversial Arizona law aimed at  restricting government services for illegal immigrants.
141036
A federal judge has ruled that a provision of the USA PATRIOT Act is an unconstitutional breach of the first and fourth amendments... US District Judge Victor Marrero, saying &quot;democracy abhors undue secrecy
245393
A federal judge on Wednesday ruled a portion of the Patriot Act is unconstitutional, the first time one of the antiterrorism law&#39;s controversial police surveillance provisions has been struck down.
225315
Two provisions of the USA Patriot Act are unconstitutional because they allow search warrants to be issued without showing probable cause, a federal judge ruled Wednesday.
312126
(InfoWorld) - A lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argued Monday that the government's defense of the controversial Child Online Protection Act (COPA) was inconsistent in defining what kind of online content is harmful to minors, and so the law should continue to remain unenforceable because it violates free speech. Chris Hansen, a staff attorney for the ACLU, said that witnesses in the government's case in support of COPA could not seem to agree on what kind of sexually explicit material or content that shows human nudity is offensive and what has artistic, scientific or political value. Because of this, COPA can be interpreted broadly and can be imposed upon legitimate Web sites such as Nerve.com, Salon.com and the Sexual Health Network, which all were named as co-plaintiffs in the case, the ACLU argued. Hansen made his arguments supporting why COPA is unconstitutional in a Philadelphia courtroom as part of closing arguments in ACLU v. Gonzalez, a four-week trial that wrapped up Monday. Hansen said that alternatives to a federal law -- such as content filters, parental supervision and education -- are effective in preventing children from being exposed to indecent and pornographic material online. He also argued that because COPA only protects content that is sent to the Web via HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol) and not Web-based content in instant messages, VOIP (voice over Internet Protocol) or content sent via FTP (File Transfer Protocol), it is too narrow to truly protect children from pornographic content online. In the law's defense, attorneys from the U.S. Department of Justice tried to poke holes in the ACLU's arguments, rejecting its claims that there are effective alternatives to COPA, such as parental monitoring and content filters, to protect children from harmful material online. "Single-parent households are common, as are places where two parents work full-time," said Joel McElvain, a Justice Department attorney. "It's nice to imagine every family can constantly keep in contact with their children's [Internet usage] but they need further help. COPA offers that help." McElvain also listed examples of sites that did not violate COPA that were blocked by well-known content filters. In this way, filters sometimes serve to block children from accessing helpful Web sites, thus "hindering children form learning about the world around them," he said. Justice Department lawyers also requested that Judge Lowell A. Reed Jr., who is hearing the case, rule that the ACLU and several of its co-plaintiffs in the case -- Free Speech Media, Philadelphia Gay News, Powell's Bookstores, Electronic Frontier Foundation and American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression -- have no legal standing in the case because their members were not called to testify about how COPA affected them. If Reed makes that decision, the ACLU's entire case would be irrelevant. The trial in Philadelphia was the culmination of eight years of litigation by the ACLU against COPA, which was signed into law in 1998. The law can impose severe criminal and civil penalties -- including stiff fines -- on individuals that put up content on the Web that the government considers harmful to minors. Previously, a federal district court in Philadelphia and a federal appeals court found COPA unconstitutional, and in 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld this ban on enforcing COPA. However, the Supreme Court also returned the ACLU's case against it to a Pennsylvania district court for a trial to see whether there are effective ways to keep children safe online that infringe upon speech less than COPA's criminal penalties. The deadline for the parties in ACLU v. Gonzalez to submit any more materials for the discovery phase is Dec. 7. The judge is expected to rule by early next year.
124631
A federal judge struck down a key part of the USA Patriot Act on Thursday in a ruling that defended the need for judicial oversight of laws and bashed Congress for passing a law that makes possible "far-reaching invasions of liberty."
371172
The state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in Seattle is offering free legal help to anyone facing FBI questioning.
664172
In a potentially landmark case in Vermont, judge says that thanks to the Fifth Amendment, a child pornography defendant doesn't need to turn over his laptop's PGP passphrase.
440257
A federal judge in New York struck down one of the Bush administration&#39;s new surveillance powers yesterday, ruling that a USA Patriot Act provision
214388
A provision of the Patriot Act that requires people who are formally contacted by the FBI for information to keep it a secret is unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled on Thursday.
324963
A Federal Court judge in New York has struck down a major provision of the controversial anti-terrorist Patriot Act. Judge Victor Marrero ruled as unconstitutional a section of the Patriot Act which allows
246705
NEW YORK Sept. 30, 2004 - The Justice Department will likely appeal a court ruling that declared unconstitutional a Patriot Act provision allowing secret and unchallengeable searches of Internet and telephone
161080
The Supreme Court made it easier Tuesday for prosecutors to win money laundering convictions, ruling unanimously in a large religious scam case that the government does not have to prove "overt acts" by defendants.