CNN news 2014-01-03 加文本

cnn news 2014-01-03

Hi, I'm Bill W. in for Anderson Cooper. Welcome to the 360 podcast.

It's judge versus judge on the NSA's phone spying program, big news scare for target customers and big win for D. Let's get started.

Today, a New York Federal Court judge weighed in on the NSA operation that collects the numbers called from all of our phones when the calls are made and for how long. It is a defeat for the American civil liberties union which sued to stop the NSA and Judge William Pally wrote: "While robot discussions are underway across the country, in Congress and at the White House, the question for this court is whether the government's bulk telephony meta-data program is lawful.This court finds that it is. One catch though, just a week ago, another federal judge, Richard Leon, looking at the very same facts, reach the exact opposite conclusion. He wrote: "I can not imagine a more discriminate and arbitrary invasion than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without our prior judicial approval. So, the question now, how do we square these 2 rulings and who gets the job doing that? Senior legal analyst Jeffery T. gets the job tonight and trying to answer both.

"So, break this down for us, Jeff. This is really interesting. A couple weeks ago, we have a judge down in Washington appointed by or nominated to bench by George W. Bush who says this is against the 4th amendment. This will not stand. We can't h. up all these meta-data and keep it forever. This judge in New York 2 weeks later appointed by Clinton disagrees. "

"It's pretty amazing situation. I've never seen something precisely like this. Here, you have 2 judges. Exactly the same legal issue inside of a couple of weeks, deciding it completely differently. I think the big difference is that the judge here in New York said there's a supreme court precedent that control this case. This is a supreme court in 1979 said when you dial the phone, you are telling the phone company what number you are dialing. You'll see it on your bill. It is not something you have any right to expect privacy."

"But again, 1979 when we have rotary phones and the founder of Facebook was negative 5."

"Correct and that's what the judge in Washington said. That may be the precedent on the books but it's absolutely now. So, I'm gonna find this violation of privacy. You know, appeal courts don't take too kindly to district court judge saying, you know, the supreme court it's wrong. So, I think the judge in New York may have the advantage on appeal and I think the odds favor although it's not a sure thing. This meta-data program's being upheld."

"And one is saying it works. The other is saying it's worthless."

"This was the thing that I found the most surprising in these whole opinions because Judge Leon in Washington said and it's being proved that this hasn't stopped any terrorist attacks. Judge Polly here in New York has a list of terrorist events would be attacked that it was stopped. I don't... I mean that's just frankly a mystery to me and I hope that get sorted out as these cases proceed because it's obviously an important question. Does this thing do any good?"

"Well, that's it. Final question, then. It has to wind its way through the a. May be a year before it hits scouts.So, knowing what you know. The bench, if the Supreme Court stays the way it is now, how do you think they come down on this?"

"I think they uphold it?"

"Why do you say that?"

"You know, National security is something that judges take very seriously and they recognize that they don't have expertise in this area. They defer to the executive branch, to the experts on these areas, and I think, ultimately, that's how it will turn out. Now, it may also be that President Obama modifies the program in some way on his own initiative. But the courts, I think, will ultimately go the way of saying we're not going to interfere. This is a political question for the executive branch. But as we have seen, different judges see it differently, and I could be wrong. It's happened before."

"I've been a fan of your work for a long time. It's great to share a set with you."

"It's good to see you, Bill."