Search for: "Query v. United States" Results 301 - 320 of 724
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Mar 2017, 9:31 am by David Kris
  Part II focuses on the new CIA guidelines and their treatment of publicly available information and related issues, including bulk collection, querying, retention and dissemination, and undisclosed participation in organizations inside the United States. [read post]
27 Feb 2017, 5:10 pm by Kevin Johnson
Kagan complained that the United States had pointed to few sources with which to interpret the statute. [read post]
14 Feb 2017, 8:36 am by Bob Farb
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, on a rehearing of a case en banc, held in United States v. [read post]
14 Feb 2017, 8:36 am by Bob Farb
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, on a rehearing of a case en banc, held in United States v. [read post]
17 Jan 2017, 4:41 pm by INFORRM
United Kingdom, the workplace surveillance was predicated upon suspicions of criminal activity, and in Copland v. [read post]
12 Jan 2017, 1:18 pm by Jane Chong
” Communications to or from federal, state, local or tribal government employees, who are U.S. persons or located in the United States, will not be intentionally selected and if inadvertently retrieved treated in accordance with the above rules regarding domestic communications/U.S. persons communications. [read post]
6 Jan 2017, 8:02 am by Chris Castle
Foreign data protection, privacy, and other laws and regulations can be more restrictive than those in the United States. [read post]
2 Jan 2017, 6:11 am
Glenn, supra.The Court of Appeals goes on to explain how and why the prosecution arose, what it involved and why Glenn was convicted:Defendant, an officer with the United States Customs and Border Patrol (CBP), worked at the Canada–United States border in Detroit, Michigan, during the relevant year of 2013. [read post]
12 Dec 2016, 11:08 am by Peter Margulies
The Fiscal Year 2017 Intelligence Reauthorization Act would hamper the PCLOB’s performance of its watchdog role, by expressly confining PCLOB oversight to the “privacy and civil liberties of United States persons. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 1:45 am by Blog Editorial
  Lord Pannick QC says it is no answer for the Government to say that the long title to the 1972 Act “says nothing about withdrawal“. 16:04: Lord Pannick QC refers to the case of Robinson v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, which he submits supports a “flexible response” to constitutional developments. [read post]