Search for: "Does 1-215"
Results 521 - 540
of 1,006
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 May 2015, 5:39 pm
Nor does the ultimate outcome of this story instill much confidence in the process. [read post]
21 May 2015, 2:26 pm
Paul's "filibuster" and what does it mean for the surveillance debate? [read post]
19 May 2015, 4:36 pm
The program does not conduct mass surveillance of American citizens—or any surveillance at all. [read post]
15 May 2015, 1:00 pm
To be sure, in the event that Section 215 does lapse on June 1, the NSA hypothetically could still seek to collect for up to ninety days, pursuant to authority granted by the FISC before the sunset. [read post]
14 May 2015, 8:51 pm
Will that be the same with 215 set to expire? [read post]
13 May 2015, 2:29 pm
” H.R. 2233 does have flaws. [read post]
12 May 2015, 1:40 pm
Does Section 215 sound grim yet? [read post]
12 May 2015, 12:51 pm
On these questions, the Court of Appeal held that (1) compliance with a noise ordinance does not foreclose a fair argument of significant noise impacts under CEQA, and (2) factual non-expert evidence can form the basis for a fair argument with respect to noise and traffic safety impacts. [read post]
12 May 2015, 10:52 am
”1 What does all this mean? [read post]
12 May 2015, 9:36 am
” Section 215 is set to expire on June 1. [read post]
11 May 2015, 10:12 pm
It’s likely that if Congress merely does a “clean” reauthorization of Section 215, then the district court in ACLU v. [read post]
11 May 2015, 2:18 pm
Where I am the observer, my preferences in Amazon are shopping preferences, while my preferences in Pandora are my listening preferences (as Pandora does not offer music directly for sale). [read post]
11 May 2015, 11:54 am
Does an employer have to grant her request? [read post]
11 May 2015, 9:00 am
The USA FREEDOM Act does not shift control of data from NSA to telecoms; the bill limits the volume of what the government can collect from companies with a single 215 order. [read post]
8 May 2015, 1:05 pm
A reader familiar with surveillance matters writes in with these two questions about yesterday’s opinion from the Second Circuit: 1) The opinion seems to turn on the Court’s belief that either not enough Members of Congress were aware or that the *right* Members of Congress (in its view) were not aware that Section 215 was being used to enable bulk collection. [read post]
7 May 2015, 2:23 pm
Ahead of Section 215’s sunset on June 1, Sen. [read post]
7 May 2015, 10:35 am
Here’s a rundown of the majority opinion, with some additional thoughts of mine at the end. 1. [read post]
6 May 2015, 7:09 pm
In addition, SSDI benefits are only provided to workers with permanent and total disabilities.1 In contrast, workers’ compensation benefits are provided for both permanent total and permanent partial disability. [read post]
29 Apr 2015, 11:06 am
The Washington Post explains that the introduction of the bill comes as the provision of the USA PATRIOT Act that authorizes this bulk collection — Section 215 — faces a June 1 sunset. [read post]
24 Apr 2015, 8:32 am
Section 215 of the Patriot Act is expiring on June 1. [read post]
