‘Sneak and peek’ bill sneaking through General Assembly

[dorminWS]

According to this article, House Bill 1946 by Delegate Jennifer McClellan, D-Richmond, allows for “administrative subpoenas”, bypassing the regular search warrant process. Under such wholesale infringement of the Fourth Amendment, law-enforcement agencies could rifle through financial transactions, phone logs, computer records and other personal data without obtaining a judge’s approval. It’s Senate counterpart, Senate Bill 919, by state Sen. Jennifer Wexton, D-Leesburg, passed 39-1 last month.

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE! Please contact your Delegate(s) and urge that they kill this bill.


http://watchdog.org/197382/sneak-peek-v ... 84ad6d7b3b

[Reverenddel]

Uh... Dorm?

The PATRIOT Act already lets them do this... VA G/A is simply following them. Under Sec. 32B... releasing data to law enforcement for suspicion of illegals acts is allowed with administrative warrants, no bench warrant needed.

People. Read the PATRIOT Act in it's complete broken down nature... It will scare the crap out of you what they have been allowed to do.

[Swampman]

Just shot this off to Senator Obenshain. It's too late for him, but I'll also shoot one off to Del. Gilbert asking him to vote against HB 1946.

Senator Obenshain,

SB 919, which you apparently voted in favor of last month allows the so-called authorities to obtain records on citizens if, there is reason to believe that the records or other information being sought are relevant to a legitimate law-enforcement investigation . . .

So this means that you agree that attorneys, law-enforcement, etc should have the ability to violate the 4th amendment right of citizens to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons and papers based on a suspicion that someone in a position of authority holds, and without presenting such suspicion to the courts.

I find this position to be in direct conflict with the 4th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, as well as Article 1, Section 10 of the Virginia Constitution that prohibits general warrants of search and seizure.

It is too late for me to ask you to vote against this bill, and I am saddened that you would favor this type of intrusion into the lives of the citizens of the Commonwealth. I understand the need to catch bad people doing bad things, but not at the expense of the freedoms and liberties of the vast majority of law abiding citizens.

Thanks for posting this Dorm.

[dorminWS]

That article may not have been exactly correct. Seems this just clarified a definition to an existing statute, which explains I guess why it went through so slick. I guess this means you can't take what watchdog.org says at face value.

Here’s what the description of the bill says:
Administrative subpoenas; electronic communication services; sealing of subpoena. Amends section that gives attorneys for the Commonwealth the authority to issue administrative subpoenas to obtain records and other information from electronic communication service and remote computing service providers if relevant to a legitimate law-enforcement investigation of certain pornography, abduction, and prostitution crimes to state that such subpoena shall be sealed if the attorney for the Commonwealth makes written certification that the disclosure of the existence of the subpoena will have an adverse result. The bill defines "adverse result."

It sounds as though this is already in effect, and this bill only sorts out a definition. And the administrative subpoenas are on in the situations listed above.

Sorry if I went off half-cocked.

[Reverenddel]

No worries. Trust me. I HATE the way the PATRIOT Act is written! It's so intrusive, it's actually frightening. You're depending on "good faith" actions by people.

Yeah, if that were true? Why do most corporations have an INTERNAL security department!?

[Swampman]

Guess that's gonna fall on deaf ears then.

[zykur]

I've been saying the 4th amendment has been on life support for years. Everything from email, online traffic, phone calls and financial transactions are spied on without a warrant. It's just a matter of time before a smaller law enforcement agency will try to use warrant-less digital searches as justification for physical and a judge allows it. Once precedent is set it's all over.

[Mindflayer]

When conservatives - oops, "Conservatives" - give me crap about being Libertarian, I usually shut them down with two words: Patriot Act.