More information from a professor of law at GW (cross-posted from the other submission about this topic):
> What makes this tricky, I think, is that Dreamhost is only involved in the initial search stage of a two-stage warrant. Computer warrants are ordinarily executed in two stages. First, the government gets access to all the electronic records. Next, the government searches through the records for the particularly described evidence. Courts have broadly allowed the government to follow this two-step procedure, in which they get all the stuff in the initial stage of electronic evidence warrants so that they can search it for the relevant evidence. Given that, Dreamhost’s objection is slightly off. As I read it, Dreamhost is essentially challenging the widely accepted two-stage warrant practice. Some federal magistrate judges in the “magistrate’s revolt” have made that argument, but they generally have been overruled at the district court level.
Good on DreamHost. But another dangerous consequence is that this creates a chilling effect. If I didn't know how to protect my privacy/anonymity online, this would definitely worry me. Freedom of association is a fundamental, constitutional right in the United States.[0]
The actions in Charlottesville are despicable, hate filled, and I feel for those who the hate was directed against. I also said the same thing about the Berkly riots where the roles were reversed.
I'm getting blastest on Facebook for mentioning what's going to suffer next: our First Amendment rights. No one has a right to issue direct threats to anyone, or call for violence, but look what people are using it for. As civil discourse breaks down, we will become less free as knee-jerk reactionary laws are quickly signed to appease the mobs. All the while Fox/CNN et all pander to their narrow minded audiences, throwing fuel on the fire.
11 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 31.2 ms ] thread> What makes this tricky, I think, is that Dreamhost is only involved in the initial search stage of a two-stage warrant. Computer warrants are ordinarily executed in two stages. First, the government gets access to all the electronic records. Next, the government searches through the records for the particularly described evidence. Courts have broadly allowed the government to follow this two-step procedure, in which they get all the stuff in the initial stage of electronic evidence warrants so that they can search it for the relevant evidence. Given that, Dreamhost’s objection is slightly off. As I read it, Dreamhost is essentially challenging the widely accepted two-stage warrant practice. Some federal magistrate judges in the “magistrate’s revolt” have made that argument, but they generally have been overruled at the district court level.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15011636
Good on DreamHost. But another dangerous consequence is that this creates a chilling effect. If I didn't know how to protect my privacy/anonymity online, this would definitely worry me. Freedom of association is a fundamental, constitutional right in the United States.[0]
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/05/when-surveillance-chil...
[0] Trivia: actually, not explicitly, but the Supreme Court upheld it as protected under the First Amendment in NAACP v. Alabama in 1958.
I'm getting blastest on Facebook for mentioning what's going to suffer next: our First Amendment rights. No one has a right to issue direct threats to anyone, or call for violence, but look what people are using it for. As civil discourse breaks down, we will become less free as knee-jerk reactionary laws are quickly signed to appease the mobs. All the while Fox/CNN et all pander to their narrow minded audiences, throwing fuel on the fire.