Feds Need A Warrant To Search Email

from the well-that's-nice dept

Tue, Jun 19th 2007 3:33am — Mike Masnick

Remember just last week we were looking at a court case that was trying to work out whether social networking messages were more private than email? Well, now a federal appeals court has strengthened the privacy of good old email as well. It turns out that federal investigators need to obtain a warrant before they can go snooping through your email. Many people probably assumed that was already the case, but the Justice Department felt differently about the matter -- and now have had both a lower court and an appeals court disagree. Of course, there will likely be another appeal, so this may end up in front of the Supreme Court eventually. However, in the meantime, it looks like at least some courts are recognizing that email users should have an expectation of privacy when it comes to their communications.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

11 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2007 @ 4:17am

Gonzales is ass covering
Because the NSA snooping almost certainly grabbed the contents of all the email. If he can argue that email has no privacy rights then he hasn't committed a crime.

It's all about staying out of jail for these guys now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Overcast, 19 Jun 2007 @ 6:14am

Actually, I assumed they monitored every bit of it.

I think the NSA has invested too much in data centers, like those within AT&T's campus to just 'stop' reading emails...

Of course, it may not be admissible in court until they get a warrant, but it's not like they are going to stop.

Rights? Who needs those anyway, huh?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SPR, 19 Jun 2007 @ 6:27am

Re: Gonzales is ass covering
"It's all about staying out of jail for these guys now.
"
Who are you kiding, they won't go to jail for that, they just won't be able to use it as evidence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Greg S., 19 Jun 2007 @ 6:41am

It's about time
It's about time that the legislative process has caught up in its understanding of the fundamental importance of e-mail as a communication tool. Now, finally, with this protection, though I'm sure it will be challenged by President Bush's cronies, e-mail can finally move past one of its greatest challenges.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Greg S., 19 Jun 2007 @ 6:42am

It's about time
It's about time that the judiciary process has caught up in its understanding of the fundamental importance of e-mail as a communication tool. Now, finally, with this protection, though I'm sure it will be challenged by President Bush's cronies, e-mail can finally move past one of its greatest challenges.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chris (profile), 19 Jun 2007 @ 7:22am

they need a warrant for it to be admissible in cou
they will totally snoop everything they can before getting a warrant. in the industry that's called a fishing expedition.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2007 @ 7:59am

FISA
"Who are you kiding, they won't go to jail for that, they just won't be able to use it as evidence."

NSA getting a direct tap off SF Internet for their Narus box is a violation of FISA. Every US Congressmans emails is included in that tap. Someone will go down for it.

Gonzales is not liked by his own party, so he's prime candidate for the fall guy/Oliver North/Lynndie England role.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Carmelo Lisciotto, 19 Jun 2007 @ 9:24am

Email-Warrants
In the uneasy days of over-compliance this is a good thing.

Carmelo Lisciotto

www.carmelolisciotto.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2007 @ 3:26pm

Encrypt Your EMail
Not that it will stop them from reading it, but will make them work harder to get at it. If everyone did that, they would spend too much time decoding everything and be days/weeks behind the traffic flow they capture. Give em H311!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
rose, 31 Aug 2007 @ 8:40am

i care
RTTGFJK
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rwolf, 15 Dec 2010 @ 10:51pm

So government without a warrant need only allege they relied on SCA in good faith to seize and use a Citizens' email as (evidence) against them in court.

The Obama government wants the FBI to conduct warrant-less searches of all Internet Activity. Police too easily can take an innocent person�s hastily written email, fax or phone call out of context to allege a crime or violation was committed to cause an arrest or civil asset forfeiture. There are more than 200 laws and violations that can subject property to government asset forfeiture. Information the FBI derives from e.g. no warrant spying on email communications can be used in court and/or lead to subpoenas to collect evidence against Americans to prosecute any crime, circumventing the Forth Amendment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]