WASHINGTON, Feb. 11, 2016 /PRNewswire/ --
Date: Friday, February 12, 2016 at 12:00 pm
Place: Courtroom 18
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
3rd and Constitution Avenues, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
The Honorable Richard J. Leon will hold a hearing to discuss the status of three on-going cases against the NSA and the CIA from violating the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution through its various "programs" which have been spying on virtually all American citizens.
Previously, in the initial case (Klayman v. Obama, 13-cv-00851), Judge Leon, on two occasions, first on December 16, 2013 and then on November 9, 2015, preliminarily enjoined the NSA and President Obama from conducting mass telephonic metadata surveillance over the plaintiffs. These historic decisions, where the court found the mass surveillance "almost Orwellian" and thus unconstitutional, are precedential and affect hundreds of millions of American citizens.
The lead plaintiff on this case, Larry Klayman, who is also lead counsel, will be asking Judge Leon to now have the case move forward to trial, after conducting discovery about the full extent of defendants' unconstitutional actions and the damage they have caused. In addition, the later two filed cases concern not just telephonic metadata mass surveillance, but also mass surveillance on all Americans' internet and social media communications.
And, one of the cases is a class action brought on behalf of all affected innocent Americans. (14-cv-00092).
Larry Klayman, founder of Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor in who was on the trial team which broke up AT&T, issued this statement:
"As Judge Leon observed, these cases are at the 'pinnacle of national importance.'" Mass surveillance of the citizenry cannot be permitted when it is likely based on reasons that go far beyond catching terrorists. Indeed, as Judge Leon found on two occasions in issuing his prior preliminary injunctions, Obama and his agents at the spy agencies have not been able to cite one instance when the unconstitutional mass surveillance caught even one terrorist. In the context of the recent political opportunism by some presidential candidates believing that this indiscriminate mass surveillance is necessary for national security in light of Paris and San Bernardino, these cases take on even greater significance. This is not an issue to be used for winning presidential primaries."
SOURCE Freedom Watch