NSA Spy Target Challenges Warrantless Wiretapping Law

The ACLU today joined a new challenge to the constitutionality of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (FAA) — the surveillance law that gives the NSA virtually unfettered access to the international phone calls and emails of U.S. citizens and residents. Disclosures over the last eight months have confirmed that the NSA is using the law to engage in dragnet surveillance, siphoning communications off the Internet backbone and also collecting them directly from companies like Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and others.

The ACLU's challenge was filed on behalf of Jamshid Muhtorov, the first criminal defendant to receive notice that he was surveilled under the FAA since the law was passed more than five years ago. Together with Mr. Muhtorov's lawyers at the Office of the Federal Public Defender of Colorado, the ACLU and the ACLU of Colorado filed a motion to suppress all evidence obtained or derived from the government's FAA surveillance of Mr. Muhtorov.

The suppression motion argues that the FAA violates both the Fourth Amendment and Article III of the Constitution because it permits the government to intercept the international communications of U.S. residents like Mr. Muhtorov without first obtaining a warrant or submitting to any kind of individualized court review. Here's how we put it in the motion:

The FAA violates the Fourth Amendment because it authorizes surveillance that violates the warrant clause and, independently, because it authorizes surveillance that is unreasonable. The statute also violates Article III by requiring judges to issue advisory opinions in the absence of a case or controversy. The procedural deficiencies of the FAA render the statute unconstitutional, and they render the surveillance of Mr. Muhtorov unconstitutional as well.

The motion filed today on behalf of Mr. Muhtorov is the latest chapter in the ACLU's challenge to the constitutionality of the FAA — a challenge that has had something of an extended prologue.

In 2008, the ACLU challenged the FAA on behalf of a coalition of human rights, media, labor, and legal organizations in Clapper v. Amnesty. Last year, a divided Supreme Court held, 5 to 4, that the Amnesty plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the law because they couldn't prove that their communications had been monitored under it. That, of course, was before the world learned from Edward Snowden that the government was using the FAA exactly as the Amnesty plaintiffs had alleged.

Significantly, the court based its Amnesty ruling in part on the government's repeated assurances that criminal defendants would receive notice of any FAA surveillance to be used against them. Those defendants would then have an opportunity to challenge the law's constitutionality, ensuring that the FAA was not altogether immune from judicial review.

But the government's assurances to the Supreme Court in Amnesty turned out to be false. Though the solicitor general apparently did not know it at the time, the Justice Department had a practice of concealing from criminal defendants the role that the FAA had played in the government's investigations of them. In fact, when Amnesty was argued, no criminal defendant had ever received notice of FAA surveillance in the five years since the FAA had been enacted. Only months after the Supreme Court's decision, as criminal defendants around the country began to demand notice of FAA surveillance, did the government's policy come to light — a policy that the solicitor general reportedly concluded "could not be justified legally" when he learned of it.

Still, it was only after extended debate within the executive branch that the Justice Department ultimately changed its flawed policy and publicly affirmed its duty to provide notice of FAA surveillance to criminal defendants.

In October of last year, Mr. Muhtorov became the first defendant to receive such a notice. (In November, the government formally notified a second defendant, Mohamed Mohamud, who had already been convicted of terrorism crimes in Oregon, that he too had been subjected to FAA surveillance.) Today, with the question of standing behind us, Mr. Muhtorov becomes the first criminal defendant to challenge the constitutionality of the FAA.

Learn more about government surveillance and other civil liberties issues: Sign up for breaking news alertsfollow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.

Add a comment (3)
Read the Terms of Use


So the ACLU is challenging the FAA of 2008 and in effect defending an accused terrorist?

Way to go ACLU. I don't want to jump to conclusions, but while this guy may be considered a US Person by legal standards, he's almost definitely a terrorist as the Govt. contends. And he would most likely not think twice about murdering innocents, including Americans at home and abroad.

I get that the ACLU's intent is to challenge the constitutionality of eavesdropping on US Persons, but I think they should wait for a better opportunity. What happens if he walks free? High fives all around? To me it makes the ACLU just seem dirty.


Would you like to know how it work's?

Seeing as we're all victim's of this global conspiracy to strip not just americans of there right's; Electronic intercept of communication constitutes a violation of 50 U.S.C. § 1861(b)(2) of The Patriot Act && Violates the civil liberties of the Data Protection Act etc, etc I could go on.

But it's easier to tell you exactly how they're doing it!

Snowden leaked cables saying they had hacked into under water cables along the atlantic shelf, this is a smoke screen for the real truth, that the entire Android OS, the entire iPhone OS and the iPad, Windows Surface are all infected with a Rootkit allowing them access.

There is no under-water hacking involved, that is purely conjecture on Snowdens part and on the part of other people who do not understand the technology.

When I analysed (Yes I am an Analyst!) my own Android OS, the first step was Jailbreaking the device, then installing custom firmware.

You too can do this: Root your Device and Install the XPrivacy Framework! Then run the OSMonitor!

Once the custom firmware was installed then tracing the entire Hack was simple and took only a few minutes, approx 30 in total.

The device when it connects to the wireless network, open's literally hundreds of Sockets which are all encrypted secure sockets, directly to the Software distributor in this Case: Google then it allows the attacker to make use of something called OVH SAS or that's SAS from the movie hackers for the rest of you technically inclined people, standing for "Switch Access Services" yea, I know what your thinking, "your thinking OMG! It actually exists!"

Those connection's then get routed via France to a telecom's provider in Spain a certain large ISP specializing in cloud hosting (OVH SAS) && (digitalocean.com) who has misconfigured their network in a way that allows for anyone to monitor customer network traffic.

So cloud hosting and cloud storage services are exactly how the Government is abusing the public trust and watching all digital traffic.

You didnt really think they went digging up cables in the Ocean did you?

There has been a lot of fear about our devices and beloved computers which is groundless, if you own Old equipment from prior to 2011 before the World Trade Center was actually Bombed by retarded fundermental nutcases then your fears are groundless.

Because it was they claim only devices shipped after that date they intentionally infected with this EViL Spyware!

Just remove the Gay little Android, the Crap iOS and anything like a Windows Phone!

& Stick with the GNU... People say well they can hack there way into anything.. No they can't!

I use a Pure Monolithic Kernel and I void Warranties and the Good News is "So can you!" that means no Python, no C++, no Perl, no Php, no Javascript, no ActiveX, no ICMP, no UDP and absolutely no ARP..

Only TCP/IP and then that device treats everything under the storage system as a file, including the device descriptors.

So they can blow there Security Enhanced Linux & FreeBSD out of there ass!

Thinking about how Cloud Storage really works!? Google Bot trawls (Trolls) literally hundreds of thousands of site's daily and that's how they help themselves to anything you thought was private, (dropbox, google drive, microsoft online storage etc) if you upload it to the cloud, you might as well have published it on the Web! Beside's a healthy dose of paranoia makes people afraid to use there own computer doesnt it! What have they done to other open source projects, well they say they intentionally leave bugs in it so they can break in later? To be honest on that one I dont really know and I dont really care!

As a Hacker, let me explain it better for those that don't understand it;

Here's what all your software maintainers that you the Public trust are not telling you!

Visual Basic - Virus City - Insecure - Broken
Perl - Insecure - Broken
Php - Insecure - Broken
Java - Virus City - Insecure - Broken
Services - Insecure - Broken
ActiveX - Insecure - Broken
DirectX - Insecure - Broken
X11 - Display Manager - Insecure - Broken
C++ Virus City - Insecure - Broken
Python - Insecure - Broken
GoLang - Insecure - Broken
SQL - Insecure - Broken
Flash Player - Insecure - Broken
Linux & BSD Kernel - Very Fuzzy - Quite Possibly - Broken

And the maintainers of all this software...

Well they're really screwing you as a consumer arnt they if they are sitting there deliberately putting back-doors in there applications because they've signed some private deal that lets them get away with doing that and selling it onward afterward and as for the people your buying your Hardware from, the less said about them the better!


What can you do about it? Fight back!

Use obscure operating systems that have not seen the light of day since the internets inception!

The humble Amiga, the Commodor 64, the Sinclair ZX, the Acorn Basic and other such Older systems resistant to this rubbish!

Throw that Windows OS in the Bin && Simply refuse to buy into any of it.

Or at least until they stop maliciously tainting your OS!

If you really believe they're going to stop all this Evil there doing to you and dismantle there 1 billion dollar data harvesting program you can forget it!

So the only other alternative is to no longer use the Internet and encourage your children to do the same!



I don't agree with defending terrorists, not that people aren't doing it when they defend the gun pimps of the NRA, but it's a Defense Attorney's JOB to defend a person no matter HOW heinous a crime they may or may not have committed.
It's not necessarily their job to find them not guilty when enough evidence exists to place their culpability beyond the shadow of a doubt. At THAT point, their job is to get the person a "fair sentence."
I think a fair sentence includes how the evidence was gathered but not entirely sure. I know someone who IS a defense attorney and he said something about the way our government is electing to gather their evidence and how the way that you choose to do it will matter in the case.

Just because a person did something heinous, and terrorists killed someone in my family so don't think I don't know what it feels like, doesn't mean you're supposed to go out and gather evidence in the ways SOME of these government people are doing and have done in the past.
They TORTURED every suspect in the Sep-11 incident just to get a confession from them.
They're so hell-bent on getting confessions that they don't even care that they're messing up future possibilities of convicting these people.
So why don't they stop DOING it that way. It isn't making them look intelligent in MY opinion. It's annoying me actually, precisely beCAUSE I knew a victim of September 11. I wanted the people who helped with it to be caught and tried, but I didn't think we were going to TORTURE them for God's sake.
I see not how that's all that different from what the torturers are accusing the tortured of being.

Sign Up for Breaking News