Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Civil Liberties

Covered at Reason 24/7: Department of Justice Looking to Expand Online Surveillance Powers

Ed Krayewski | 3.19.2013 11:00 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

hi feds
Reason 24/7

The Department of Justice has dropped its push for police to be able to access e-mails without a warrant, but would still like federal agencies to have those powers, and more.

From CNET:

The Obama administration has dropped its insistence that police should be able to warrantlessly peruse Americans' e-mail correspondence.

But at the same time, the Justice Department is advancing new proposals that would expand government surveillance powers over e-mail messages, Twitter direct messages, and Facebook direct messages in other ways…

Elana Tyrangiel, a former White House lawyer who's now an acting assistant attorney general, will announce the department's new policy positions at a congressional hearing that's scheduled to take place tomorrow morning.

Tyrangiel's written testimony says the current rules -- enacted during the pre-Internet era in the form of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 -- "may have made sense in the past" but "have failed to keep up with the development of technology, and the ways in which individuals and companies use, and increasingly rely on, electronic and stored communications."

But she also says that the department's civil attorneys investigating antitrust, environmental, civil rights and other cases -- and presumably other federal agencies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Trade Commission -- should have warrantless access to Americans' electronic correspondence.

The crux of the federal government's argument is that computers ought to be treated like landline telephones under the (pre-Internet) law.

Follow these stories and more at Reason 24/7 and don't forget you can e-mail stories to us at 24_7@reason.com and tweet us at @reason247.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: New Chinese President Headed for Africa

Ed Krayewski is a former associate editor at Reason.

Civil LibertiesNanny State
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (17)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Jordan   12 years ago

    So, which novel will this administration make non-fiction sooner: Atlas Shrugged, or 1984?

    1. np   12 years ago

      But it's to investigate antitrust, environmental, civil rights, SEC and FTC and tax violations!

      Why do you want more dead children?

    2. CatoTheElder   12 years ago

      Ha! Obama has already far surpassed Big Brother's surveillance capabilities and intrusiveness. Today's Beltway Bandits make Wesley Mouch look like an anarcho-capitalist . Victimology is the state religion that celebrates the saintliness of looters and moochers.

      But, since there is no John Galt, I'd have to say 1984. The Junior Anti-Sex League is still missing, though.

      1. ant1sthenes   12 years ago

        I thought they were called feminists.

  2. The Late P Brooks   12 years ago

    Whatever it takes to keep America and Her children safe.

    1. CatoTheElder   12 years ago

      Why would any citizen object, unless they had something to hide?

      "To those who scare peace loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: your tactics aid terrorists..." according to Bush0bama Attorney General Ashcroft, and should be punished as the treason that it is!

  3. gaijin   12 years ago

    The crux of the federal government's argument is that computers ought to be treated like landline telephones under the (pre-Internet) law.

    Wait, I thought you had to have a warrant to wiretap a landline phone...wouldn't that be at odds with the gist of this story as the feds looking for warrantless snooping powers?

  4. Jerryskids   12 years ago

    Just a minor quibble - the government already has the power to monitor you 24/7 (and I'm pretty sure they use it in plenty of cases), what they want is the authority. The question is - will they continue to use the power without the authority? And who do you trust to tell us that they are continuing to use unauthorized powers when those powers become explicitly unauthorized?

    1. Hugh Akston   12 years ago

      They will continue to monitor peoples' communications regardless of whether Congress authorizes them to. What they want is for the results of those snoops to be admissible in court.

  5. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

    Here's a valuable piece of information: You don't see headlines that say, "Department of Justice Looking to Contract _____________ Powers."

    Government always seeks more power. Always. If we don't do everything we can all the time to prevent its growth, more power it will get. Even in anarchy, everyone has to keep knocking down those seeking power over others. In miniarchy, it's even harder, because some government is, by definition, accepted.

    1. Hugh Akston   12 years ago

      SO the first step is to kill all the lawyers?

      1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

        If only it were that simple.

  6. The Late P Brooks   12 years ago

    Government always seeks more power.

    We should have established some sort of contractual arrangement specifying the powers and duties we consented to cede to the government.
    You know, to eliminate confusion.

    Why didn't we think of that?

    1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

      The one we used apparently needs amending.

      1. $park?   12 years ago

        I'm told it's not a suicide pact.

        1. Pro Libertate   12 years ago

          It's not, but the distortions in its name very well may be.

  7. The Late P Brooks   12 years ago

    "This Constitution did not die of natural causes.

    "It was MURDER!"

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

In Dangerous Times, Train for Self-Defense

J.D. Tuccille | 6.2.2025 7:00 AM

Welcoming Anti-Trump Liberals to the Free Trade Club

Katherine Mangu-Ward | From the July 2025 issue

Brickbat: Armed, Elderly, and Dangerous

Charles Oliver | 6.2.2025 4:00 AM

How Trump's Tariffs and Immigration Policies Could Make Housing Even More Expensive

M. Nolan Gray | From the July 2025 issue

Photo: Dire Wolf De-extinction

Ronald Bailey | From the July 2025 issue

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!