Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
On May 20, 2015, Paul spoke for ten and a half hours in opposition to the reauthorization of Section 215 of the Patriot Act. [46] At midnight on May 31, 2015, Section 215 expired. [47] With the passage of the USA Freedom Act on June 2, 2015 the expired parts of law, including Section 215, were reported broadly as restored and renewed through ...
A look at the post-Sept. 11 surveillance provisions that expired on Monday, June 1, 2015: Section 215 of the Patriot Act This has been used to authorize the National Security Agency's bulk ...
The bill ultimately passed the Senate 67–32 on June 2, 2015 [67] [68] [69] and reinstated three lapsed authorities i.e. the "Section 215" authority, the "lone wolf" authority and the "roving wiretaps" authority of the Patriot Act, [70] while reforming the "Section 215" authority. President Obama signed the legislation on the sixth day.
On November 5, 2013, Apple became the most prominent company to publicly state that it had never received an order for user data under Section 215 of the Patriot Act. [ 12 ] [ 13 ] On September 18, 2014, GigaOm reported that the warrant canary statement did not appear anymore in the next two Apple Transparency Reports, covering July–December ...
The U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has ruled the National Security Agency may temporarily resume its bulk collection of Americans' domestic phone call records, the New York Times ...
Argues that the Internet surveillance provisions of the Patriot Act updated the law in ways that both law enforcement and civil libertarians should appreciate. Michael J. Woods (2005), Counterintelligence and access to transactional records: a practical history of USA PATRIOT Act section 215, The Patriot Debates.
The ACLU argued that the program violated the U.S. Constitution's guarantees of privacy and information as well as exceeding the scope of its authorizing legislation, Section 215 of the Patriot Act. The U.S. government countered that the program is constitutional and that Congress was fully informed when it authorized and reauthorized Section 215.
Section 215 also had a "gag" provision, which was changed to allow the defendant to contact their attorney. [222] However, the change meant that the defendant was also required to tell the FBI who they were disclosing the order to; this requirement was removed by the USA PATRIOT Act Additional Reauthorizing Amendments Act. [223]