Gov't Argument Labeled 'Gobbledygook'

by TChris

The Bush administration wants to make it easier for law enforcement agencies to wiretap calls made over the internet. The FCC made its pitch to a panel of federal judges today, and the response is priceless:

A judge said the government's courtroom arguments were "gobbledygook."

The judge also characterized the arguments as "nonsense." It gets even better:

"Your argument makes no sense," U.S. Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards told the lawyer for the Federal Communications Commission, Jacob Lewis. "When you go back to the office, have a big chuckle. I'm not missing this. This is ridiculous. Counsel!"

In the current case, Edwards appeared especially skeptical over the FCC's decision to require that providers of Internet phone service and broadband services must ensure their equipment can accommodate police wiretaps under the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, known as CALEA. ...

The 1994 law was originally aimed at ensuring court-ordered wiretaps could be placed on wireless phones.

The Justice Department is worried that a mode of communication might exist that makes private communication possible, without fear of government interception. It should take its complaints to Congress, which specifically exempted "information services" from the reach of the 1994 law.

< Patrick Kennedy To Enter Rehab | Juror Explains Refusal to Convict Awadallah >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Gov't Argument Labeled 'Gobbledygook' (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri May 05, 2006 at 02:10:42 PM EST
    It's too bad he didn't use "jibber jabber" since then we'd know he watches Boston Legal.

    Re: Gov't Argument Labeled 'Gobbledygook' (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri May 05, 2006 at 02:12:14 PM EST
    This stopped being about security months, if not years ago. It's the J edger Hoover school of philosophy. Gather the dirt on anybody who is anybody, and anybody who is not. A big enough worry that dissent in the public square is being eroded faster than the ice caps, but the implications of where this is heading, on both sides of the Atlantic, is something that goes beyond Orwellian.

    Re: Gov't Argument Labeled 'Gobbledygook' (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri May 05, 2006 at 04:57:55 PM EST
    This is a great day! Judge Edwards is another great patriot, just as our juror from the previous post. Good people with whom to share a country.