[El Scorcho]

Senate bill rewrite lets feds read your e-mail without warrants

Proposed law scheduled for a vote next week originally increased Americans' e-mail privacy. Then law enforcement complained. Now it increases government access to e-mail and other digital files.

by Declan McCullagh November 20, 2012 4:00 AM PST

A Senate proposal touted as protecting Americans' e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, giving government agencies more surveillance power than they possess under current law.

CNET has learned that Patrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to law enforcement concerns. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantless access to Americans' e-mail, is scheduled for next week.

Leahy's rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies -- including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission -- to access Americans' e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge.

Full story: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552 ... -warrants/

Okay, Republicans. You want to win me over? Stand up to this. Show me that you're against big government. Show me that you oppose the emerging Orwellian police state.

[El Scorcho]

Highlights from the revised bill:

✭ Grants warrantless access to Americans' electronic correspondence to over 22 federal agencies. Only a subpoena is required, not a search warrant signed by a judge based on probable cause.

✭ Permits state and local law enforcement to warrantlessly access Americans' correspondence stored on systems not offered "to the public," including university networks.

✭ Authorizes any law enforcement agency to access accounts without a warrant -- or subsequent court review -- if they claim "emergency" situations exist.

✭ Says providers "shall notify" law enforcement in advance of any plans to tell their customers that they've been the target of a warrant, order, or subpoena.

✭ Delays notification of customers whose accounts have been accessed from 3 days to "10 business days." This notification can be postponed by up to 360 days.

[ALUmnus]

I think you are officially the first person to use stars in a post.

But, yeah, this is bad. Right now I don't know if I'd question the Republicans' principle as much as I'd question their will. There is SO much down the line that they'll have to fight, they may not see this as worth it, which is of course wrong.

[El Scorcho]

The stars were a direct result of copy/paste from the article. I don't hate them, though.

I agree. The Republicans won't fight it like they should. I wrote to my Senators today (one D and one R). I'm curious to see what the response will be.

I've tried to be pretty noisy about this, though. I'd rather it not slip by. My life will be quite a bit more difficult if I have to encrypt everything I put on the Internet.

[jmdickens]

The stars were a direct result of copy/paste from the article. I don't hate them, though.

I agree. The Republicans won't fight it like they should. I wrote to my Senators today (one D and one R). I'm curious to see what the response will be.

I've tried to be pretty noisy about this, though. I'd rather it not slip by. My life will be quite a bit more difficult if I have to encrypt everything I put on the Internet.

I wrote Renee Elmers(R) 2nd District in NC when she supported CISPA, H.R.3523 back in April and asked for an appointment to meet with her about her decision to end internet privacy. She gave some BS response how this would ensure cyber security and personal privacy. They all suck. period.....

[El Scorcho]

Follow-up:

Leahy dropped this idea within hours. Apparently I was not the only one who was outraged.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552 ... ance-bill/