A US judge on Wednesday blocked federal prosecutors from searching data on a Washington Post reporter’s electronic devices seized during what one press freedom group called an “unconstitutional and illegal” raid last week.
US Magistrate Judge William B. Porter in Alexandria, Virginia—who also authorized the January 14 raid of Post reporter Hannah Natanson’s home—ruled that “the government must preserve but must not review any of the materials that law enforcement seized pursuant to search warrants the court issued.”
The government has until January 28 to respond to the Post’s initial legal filings against the agent’s actions. Oral arguments in the case are scheduled for February 6.
Good thing I totally trust the DOJ to follow court orders.
Always ironic when they complain about others not following orders.
In this case they would have to as there would be no way to hide that they accessed the data without a warrant and also the material would be rendered inadmissible and whoever the DOJ was hoping to jail gets to walk away free
IT guy here, unless the computer case was sealed, they could pop the drive and use it to make a disk image or simply clone it to another drive, the only way I can see how that could be detected is if you have a log of how many hours it has been powered on and compare it to the drives log.
The point is, none of that data can be used as evidence. If the DOJ presents any evidence that could only have come from that drive (cloned or otherwise) their entire case goes out the window and they get in trouble. Though with the way consequences are being ignored lately I doubt that’s their main concern.
They can always use parallel construction
Same issue. It’s called chain of evidence, something that is required for evidence to be admissible.
No matter what solution one can come up with the origin of the evidence is needed
Parallel construction is a tactic that is used specifically in situations similar to this, in the interest of hiding illegal evidence usage by investigators (amongst other things)
Oh no! What would happen to them if they were caught?
The material is declared inadmissible and whoever they are prosecuting gets to walk free
Assuming the courts actually follow their own rules, which depending on the judge is a crapshoot now. And if it got there through appeals, the SC is just as likely to allow because they’re complicit.
Also, they’ll still have to data to do whatever the fuck else they want to with it. Like going after others.
Erm in this case they would. Yes the Trump administration has had a lot of leeway but the Judicial system is not a full on rubber stamp just yet.
And as for the Supreme Court no they actually won’t because the plain text is rather clear. You need a warrant to collect evidence.
“Have a warrant for the phone and whatever is on it? If not sorry per the explicit saying of the constitution it is inadmissible.”
And those others also getting released as it relied on warentless material.
because the plain text is rather clear
So is the 2nd amendment, that hasn’t stopped them even before the modern political climate. The entire text is a single sentence, explicitly in reference to a regulated militia. That doesn’t stop them from saying it means everyone and their fucking dog.
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”.
Given who is in power now the whole “it gives you the constitutional right to a fire arm.” Might want to be reconsidered.
(To be clear not saying Charlie Kirk’s “mass shootings is an acceptable thing to keep our guns.” Logic is still absolutely BS. It’s just with the State on the Federal level and in every Republican controlled state turning to Facisim at a rapid pace a community defense that is armed is looking rather valuable to have.)
I don’t believe that would happen
there would be no way to hide that they accessed the data
How on earth do you even detect that a drive has been accessed? What is there to hide?
I think what he’s saying is, even if they do access it, they can’t ever bring any of that info into a court anywhere without admitting they accessed it.
They can only use information they obtain illegally from this data that has some kind of parallel construction from another source.
Yeah if the data was from a source that the courts considered legal then it would then be viable
Well, they can try and put it in as evidence somewhere, but no judge would ever accept it after this
Narrator: And they searched the data anyway.
I would be highly surprised if they haven’t yet cloned the drive
