<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>USLegal Reporter &#187; Privacy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://reporter.uslegal.com/category/privacy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com</link>
	<description>Just another USLegal Blogs weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:14:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Sheriff Joe Arpaio&#8217;s Address Posted on Facebook Site</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2010/02/01/sheriff-joe-arpaios-address-posted-on-facebook-site/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2010/02/01/sheriff-joe-arpaios-address-posted-on-facebook-site/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 21:22:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dana Altman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sheriff Joe Arpaio]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/?p=995</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new Facebook group created to remove Sheriff Joe Arpaio from power has created controversy after one of the page&#8217;s members posted the location of the Sheriff&#8217;s home. The group, which has grown to over 8,000 members in a single week, includes commentary about Arpaio, pictures taken from protests and information about future demonstrations. A [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new Facebook group created to remove Sheriff Joe Arpaio from power has created controversy after one of the page&#8217;s members posted the location of the Sheriff&#8217;s home. The group, which has grown to over 8,000 members in a single week, includes commentary about Arpaio, pictures taken from protests and information about future demonstrations. A recent post included a map to the Sheriff&#8217;s home in Fountain Hills and a satellite picture of the property.<span id="more-995"></span></p>
<p>The sheriff is known for overseeing the Tent City Jail, where inmates are housed under surplus military tents. Broiling summer heat or chilly desert winter, all 2,000 inmates live outside, sleeping on cots in old canvas tents. Pink undergarments are only one of Arpaio&#8217;s many innovative jail policies. For food, the sheriff serves inmates green — as in fetid — baloney sandwiches.</p>
<p> In Maricopa County jails, inmates don old-fashioned prison stripes and work on chain gangs. Arpaio&#8217;s extreme tactics, many of which specifically target illegal immigrants,  have kept him in the public eye since he took office back in 1993.</p>
<p>Sources: <a href="http://www.azfamily.com/news/Anti-Arpaio-Facebook-group-publishes-location-of-Sheriffs-house-83088572.html">http://www.azfamily.com/news/Anti-Arpaio-Facebook-group-publishes-location-of-Sheriffs-house-83088572.html</a></p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2010/02/01/sheriff-joe-arpaios-address-posted-on-facebook-site/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court to Rule on Privacy of Text Messages</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/12/15/supreme-court-to-rule-on-privacy-of-text-messages/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/12/15/supreme-court-to-rule-on-privacy-of-text-messages/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:24:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dana Altman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/?p=967</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether employees have a constitutional right to privacy in their personal text messages sent on employer-owned pagers. The case involves text messages of a police officer in Ontario, California, Sgt. Jeff Quon, who sent and received hundreds of text messages on his city-owned pager, some of which [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether employees have a constitutional right to privacy in their personal text messages sent on employer-owned pagers. The case involves text messages of a police officer in Ontario, California, Sgt. Jeff Quon, who sent and received hundreds of text messages on his city-owned pager, some of which were sexually explicit. Quon and three fellow officers claim their Fourth Amendment rights were violated by the city of Ontario. According to the officers, they were told they could send personal messages on the pagers, but they would have to reimburse the city for messages over a 25,000 word limit. The officers had signed an acknowledgment that they had no expectation of privacy when using computers or other devices issued by the city of Ontario.<span id="more-967"></span></p>
<p>The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the officers, finding that the phone service provider violated their rights by revealing the content of the messages. The Supreme Court will review whether the officers&#8217; rights under the 4th Amendment, which forbids &#8220;unreasonable searches&#8221; by the government, were violated. The Court&#8217;s ruling, expected by June, could set new rules for the workplace in public agencies, and be extended to apply to private companies as well.</p>
<p>Sources:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/supreme_court_to_decide_privacy_rights_of_texting_government_employees/">http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/supreme_court_to_decide_privacy_rights_of_texting_government_employees/</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-court-privacy15-2009dec15,0,5684529.story">http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-court-privacy15-2009dec15,0,5684529.story</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/12/15/supreme-court-to-rule-on-privacy-of-text-messages/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NSA to Build $1.6 Billion Storage Facility to House Personal Surveillance Data</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/11/03/nsa-to-build-2-billion-storage-facility-to-house-personal-surveillance-data/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/11/03/nsa-to-build-2-billion-storage-facility-to-house-personal-surveillance-data/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:52:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dana Altman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[big brother]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security Agency]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/?p=937</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The National Security Agency is planning to build a $1.6 billion storage facility in Utah to warehouse personal data. The giant facility will contain more than 1 million square feet of data center space. Construction is scheduled to begin in June 2010 and be completed by March 2013. The new facility is estimated to require [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The National Security Agency is planning to build a $1.6 billion storage facility in Utah to warehouse personal data. The giant facility will contain more than 1 million square feet of data center space. Construction is scheduled to begin in June 2010 and be completed by March 2013. The new facility is estimated to require as much electricity as all of  Salt Lake City. All forms of electronic data will be stored at the center, such as intercepted phone calls, e-mail messages, Internet searches and other communications intercepted by the agency.<span id="more-937"></span><br />
<!--more--><br />
The effort was publicly disclosed in early 2008 and is designed to bolster cybersecurity-related awareness and incident response across the federal government. Much of the effort remains highly classified. It is partly an effort by federal agencies to reduce their exposure to Internet-based threats by reducing and consolidating the number of external Internet connections across government.  Instead of having each agency manage its own Internet connections, the plan involves having a small group of  Trusted Internet Connection (TIC) providers administer centralized connectivity and gateway-monitoring services for federal agencies. Critics of the project argue that the collection and permanant storage of such personal data is not necessary for national security purposes and intrudes upon the privacy rights of citizens.</p>
<p>Sources:  <a href="http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_12744661">http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_12744661</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/07/01/nsa-plans-16-billion-utah-data-center/">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/07/01/nsa-plans-16-billion-utah-data-center/</a></p>
<p><a href="http://gizmodo.com/5395095/the-nsa-to-store-a-yottabyte-of-your-phone-calls-emails-and-other-big-brothery-stuff">http://gizmodo.com/5395095/the-nsa-to-store-a-yottabyte-of-your-phone-calls-emails-and-other-big-brothery-stuff</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/11/01/nsa-to-store-yottabytes-of-surveillance-data-in-utah-megarepository/">http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/11/01/nsa-to-store-yottabytes-of-surveillance-data-in-utah-megarepository/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/11/03/nsa-to-build-2-billion-storage-facility-to-house-personal-surveillance-data/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Congress Considers Yahoo and Microsoft Partnership</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/09/01/congress-considers-yahoo-and-microsoft-partnership/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/09/01/congress-considers-yahoo-and-microsoft-partnership/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 20:25:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dana Altman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[behaviorally targeted marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yahoo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/?p=896</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yahoo and Microsoft have proposed a partnership in search and advertising, prompting legislators to review privacy issues in behaviorally targeted marketing practices that track users&#8217; activity online. Federal legislation has been proposed to allow users to actively &#8220;opt in&#8221; to programs that track their browsing. Currently, users to opt-out of behavioral tracking and few people [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yahoo and Microsoft have proposed a partnership in search and advertising, prompting legislators to review privacy issues in behaviorally targeted marketing practices that track users&#8217; activity online. Federal legislation has been proposed to allow users to actively &#8220;opt in&#8221; to programs that track their browsing. Currently, users to opt-out of behavioral tracking and few people bother to do so.</p>
<p>Yahoo reported that out of 140 million U.S. visitors to its sites in July 2008, &#8220;approximately 75,000&#8243; visited its opt-out page. Microsoft reported that out of 130 million U.S. visitors to its sites in August 2008, only approximately 1,800 opted out. eMarketer estimates that spending on behaviorally targeted advertising in the U.S. will quadruple to $4.4 billion by 2012.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/planned-privacy-law-may-hamper-online-ad-industry-2009-09-01">http://www.marketwatch.com/story/planned-privacy-law-may-hamper-online-ad-industry-2009-09-01</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2009/09/01/congress-considers-yahoo-and-microsoft-partnership/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>D.C. Handgun Ban Amendment</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/17/dc-handgun-ban-amendment/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/17/dc-handgun-ban-amendment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 14:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Della Sellers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/17/dc-handgun-ban-amendment/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Washington D.C. City Council passed a temporary amendment to its handgun ban Tuesday to comply with the recent Heller Supreme Court decision. Under the new legislation, D.C. residents must submit to and pass a criminal background check, eye exam and ballistics test prior to receiving a gun permit. Residents must also limit the ammunition [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Washington D.C. City Council passed a temporary <a href="http://dc.gov/mayor/pdf/showpdf.asp?pdfName=7-14_Firearms_Control_Emergency_Amendment_Act-July14_DRAFT.pdf">amendment</a> to its handgun ban Tuesday to comply with the recent <em>Heller</em> Supreme Court decision. Under the new legislation, D.C. residents must submit to and pass a criminal background check, eye exam and ballistics test prior to receiving a gun permit. Residents must also limit the ammunition they carry to less than 12 rounds, and all firearms must include trigger locks or be stored unloaded and unassembled except when used for self-defense. The legislation characterizes self defense as necessary when there is a &#8220;reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm to a person within the registrant&#8217;s home.&#8221;</p>
<p>The temporary legislation expires in 90 days, after which further permanent gun legislation will be enacted.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/washington-dc-city-council-passes.php">http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/washington-dc-city-council-passes.php</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/17/dc-handgun-ban-amendment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bush Signs New Surveillance Bill into Law, Lawsuit Follows</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/10/bush-signs-new-surveillance-bill-into-law/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/10/bush-signs-new-surveillance-bill-into-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:01:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>carrie</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Civil Immunity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/10/bush-signs-new-surveillance-bill-into-law/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[President Bush today signed into law the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008. The legislation overhauls US wiretapping and surveillance laws. 
Most notably, the (FISA) Amendments Act contains two key provisions. One now expands the power of the nation&#8217;s intelligence agencies to eavesdrop on the communications of suspected terrorists under emergency circumstances without a court order, but stipulates that the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>President Bush today signed into law the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008. The legislation overhauls US wiretapping and surveillance laws. </p>
<p>Most notably, the (FISA) Amendments Act contains two key provisions. One now expands the power of the nation&#8217;s intelligence agencies to eavesdrop on the communications of suspected terrorists under emergency circumstances without a court order, but stipulates that the agencies must go through a FISA court in order to obtain permission to conduct routine electronic surveillance. Also, the bill provides retroactive immunity to telecom companies from invasion of privacy lawsuits brought by individuals concerned over the industry’s participation in warrantless surveillance under the Bush Administration.  </p>
<p>On the heels of the President signing the legislation, The American Civil Liberties Union, Amenesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other civil liberty groups filed a lawsuit in Manhattan federal court over concerns that the legislation threatens American&#8217;s privacy.</p>
<p> Sources: <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/07/20080710-2.html">http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/07/20080710-2.html</a>, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/washington/10fisa.html?bl&amp;ex=1215748800&amp;en=bfa61dce8f16e341&amp;ei=5087%0A">http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/washington/10fisa.html?bl&amp;ex=1215748800&amp;en=bfa61dce8f16e341&amp;ei=5087%0A</a>, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1044211720080710">http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1044211720080710</a> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/10/bush-signs-new-surveillance-bill-into-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Senate Approves Surveillance Legislation without Amendments</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/09/senate-approves-surveillance-legislation-without-amendments-2/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/09/senate-approves-surveillance-legislation-without-amendments-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:55:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Della Sellers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Civil Immunity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/09/senate-approves-surveillance-legislation-without-amendments-2/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The US Senate Wednesday rejected proposed amendments to legislation that would amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act but limit civil immunity for telecommunication companies that participated in the government&#8217;s warrantless wiretapping program.
After President Bush threatened to veto any legislation that did not offer full immunity, the Senate approved the bill to overhaul eavesdropping rules and regulations complete with [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The US Senate Wednesday rejected proposed amendments to legislation that would amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act but limit civil immunity for telecommunication companies that participated in the government&#8217;s warrantless wiretapping program.</p>
<p>After President Bush threatened to veto any legislation that did not offer full immunity, the Senate <a href="http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&amp;session=2&amp;vote=00168">approved</a> the bill to overhaul eavesdropping rules and regulations complete with an immunity provision. The President is expected to sign the legislation soon.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/senate-rejects-bid-to-deny-immunity-for.php">http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/senate-rejects-bid-to-deny-immunity-for.php</a></p>
<p> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/09/senate-approves-surveillance-legislation-without-amendments-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bush Threatens to Veto Surveillance Legislation if Amendment Included</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/08/bush-threatens-to-veto-surveillance-legislation-if-amendment-included/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/08/bush-threatens-to-veto-surveillance-legislation-if-amendment-included/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:01:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Della Sellers</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Civil Immunity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/08/bush-threatens-to-veto-surveillance-legislation-if-amendment-included/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Director of National Intelligence Jack McConnell and Attorney General Michael Mukasey sent a letter Monday on behalf of the Bush Administration to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid threatening to veto surveillance legislation the House of Representatives recently passed if the Senate approves a version with certain amendments. 
The Bingaman Amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act would eliminate the immunity [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Director of National Intelligence Jack McConnell and Attorney General Michael Mukasey sent a <a href="http://www.eff.org/files/DNI-AG-Ltr-07-07-08.pdf">letter</a> Monday on behalf of the Bush Administration to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid threatening to veto surveillance legislation the House of Representatives recently passed if the Senate approves a version with certain amendments. </p>
<p>The Bingaman Amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act would eliminate the immunity included in the compromise legislation for  participation in the warrantless wiretapping program by telecommunications companies if the Inspector General decides the government&#8217;s surveillance program was illegal. The Senate is scheduled to vote on the amendment and legislation next week.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/bush-calls-on-congress-to-reject-fisa.php">http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/bush-calls-on-congress-to-reject-fisa.php</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/08/bush-threatens-to-veto-surveillance-legislation-if-amendment-included/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Privacy Advocates File Suit Over Cell Phone Tracking</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/02/privacy-advocates-file-suit-over-cell-phone-tracking/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/02/privacy-advocates-file-suit-over-cell-phone-tracking/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:52:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>carrie</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/02/privacy-advocates-file-suit-over-cell-phone-tracking/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union have filed a lawsuit againt the Department of Justice over mobile phone records. The groups want to know if the government is illegally tracking the cell phone acitivity of Americans. The suit was filed yesterday in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
In their [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union have filed a lawsuit againt the Department of Justice over mobile phone records. The groups want to know if the government is illegally tracking the cell phone acitivity of Americans. The suit was filed yesterday in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.</p>
<p>In their complaint, the EFF and ACLU said, &#8220;The information now in the public domain suggests that [the DOJ] may be engaging in unauthorized and potentially unconstitutional tracking of individuals through their mobile phones. Information pertaining to the DOJ&#8217;s procedures for obtaining real-time tracking information is vital to the public&#8217;s understanding of the privacy risks of carrying a mobile phone and of, more generally, the government&#8217;s expansive view of its surveillance powers.&#8221;</p>
<p>The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request last fall seeking guidelines and documents relate to tracking cellphone users. However, the government has not yet provided any information.</p>
<p>Sources: <a href="http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/35874prs20080701.html">http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/35874prs20080701.html</a>, <a href="http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/35873lgl20080701.html">http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/35873lgl20080701.html</a>, </p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/idg/IDG_852573C4006938808525747A0049B6CA.html?ref=technology">http://www.nytimes.com/idg/IDG_852573C4006938808525747A0049B6CA.html?ref=technology</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/07/02/privacy-advocates-file-suit-over-cell-phone-tracking/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>House Passes New Surveillance Bill</title>
		<link>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/06/20/house-passes-new-surveillance-bill/</link>
		<comments>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/06/20/house-passes-new-surveillance-bill/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2008 20:11:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>carrie</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/06/20/house-passes-new-surveillance-bill/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.S. House of Representatives today passed a bill which will overhaul US wiretapping and surveillance laws. 
Most notably, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008 contains two key provisions. One would give the government ongoing authority to eavesdrop on the communications of suspected terrorists without first obtaining a court order. Also, the bill would give retroactive immunity to telecom companies from [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The U.S. House of Representatives today passed a bill which will overhaul US wiretapping and surveillance laws. </p>
<p>Most notably, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008 contains two key provisions. One would give the government ongoing authority to eavesdrop on the communications of suspected terrorists without first obtaining a court order. Also, the bill would give retroactive immunity to telecom companies from invasion of privacy lawsuits brought by individuals concerned over the industry&#8217;s participation in warrantless surveillance under the Bush Administration.  </p>
<p>The Senate is expected to take up the measure next week.</p>
<p> Source: <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.6304">http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.6304</a>:</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reporter.uslegal.com/2008/06/20/house-passes-new-surveillance-bill/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
