VIEWPOINT How to evaluate the NSA program The fight over CO2 THERESA KENNELLY TiRE'S A REASON The Michigan Daily - Tuesday, May 30, 2006 - 5 BY DAVID PURO s The Michigan Daily would bet- ter inform its readers if it made them aware of the applicable interpretation of the Fourth Amendment as well as e the applicable statutes. In response to t A Gap in Credibility (05/22/2006), I b would like to remind readers that the t Supreme Court has ruled that, while I the fourth amendment protects against I unreasonable searches and seizures, I recording the numbers dialed by an individual does not constitute a search under the Fourth Amendment, and thus no warrant is required. s In Smith v. Maryland (1979), the I Court ruled that an individual who e had a pen register applied to record the numbers dialed did not have a f legitimate expectation of privacy because those numbers were auto- t matically turned over to a third party - the phone company. The pen register recorded the numbers at the t phone company exchange and not i inside the home. Furthermore, the t court was unwilling to rule that soci- t ety would recognize a right to have phone records remain private. Thus, it i concluded that installation of the pen f register was not a search and no war- rant was required - the government could collect this information at will. L As long as the government has a specific suspect in mind, the use of U a device that records dialed numbers does not constitute a search under the Fourth Amendment. As applied to the National Security Agency phone t records debate, the case could be argued to contend says that the num- bers dialed are not private and their collection by the government is not a search under the Fourth Amendment. That said, the NSA program r raises other statutory concerns. It may require the government seek judicial approval based on statute. s Title III of the Electronic Commu- t nications Privacy Act says "no per- son may install or use a pen register I or a trap and trace device without first obtaining a court order," which may be obtained by proving that t "the information (is) likely to be obtained by such instillation and (its) use is relevant to an ongoing - investigation." The probable cause LETTERS Continued from Page 4 that I, as a "savvy consumer," avoid. That said, my activism comes from a desire to help those workers that . Wal-Mart has silenced, and this is not "misguided." Aria Everts LSA sophomore The letter writer is a member of Stu- dents Organizing for Labor and Eco- nomic Equality. tandard for Fourth Amendment earches is not required because the Sept. 11 attacks could constitute an ongoing investigation. Moreover, the US Patriot Act xpanded the definition ofpen registers o include not just telephone addresses, but also internet addresses visited and he senders and recipients of e-mails. n sum, pen registers are not subject to Fourth Amendment analysis, but the ECPA statute requires that the govern- ment get court approval with less than a probable-cause standard. ECPA is not the only potential tatute applicable to the NSA pro- gram. Under the Patriot Act, the For- ign Intelligence Surveillance Act governs in the place of ECPA when oreign intelligence gathering is a 'significant purpose"of the investiga- ion. If the NSA program was based on FISA and in fact included records Af U.S. citizens or resident aliens, he government would have to show probable cause that the parties subject o the recording "may" or "are about o" be involved in a criminal act. The decision on this is secret, and is made n front of the FISA court of seven ederal district court judges. President Bush could attempt to authorize the pen register for every U.S. citizen and legal resident under authority granted by Article II of the US Constitution as Commander in Chief or as an emergency power if he was unable to meet the FISA require- ments. Bush has used these justifica- ions previously and may have relied on them in this case. The Supreme Court, however, has made it clear that a president's power is limited when acting contrary to the stated policy sf Congress. In such a case, Congress equires the executive to follow ECPA or FISA in order to use pen registers. The readers of The Michigan Daily hould be better able to evaluate he legality of the NSA program as new details emerge regarding whose phone records were accessed, wheth- er the government obtained a court order and the validity of the justifica- ion given to support the court order depending on whether the govern- ment relied on ECPA or FISA. Puro is a University alum. Sports editors should better use space TO THE DAILY: I am writing to express my dis- pleasure with a small text box located on last week's back page in the Sports section (05/22/2006). It read: "Dear LeBron ... Shave your stupid beard, ass. And ditch Jordan's number, you nail-biting prick." Is this the proper forum for your sports writers to voice personal opinions on the hygienic habits of a basketballiplayer? I realize that we're only talking about a small text box, but one would think that this kind of locker-room/living-room- couch talkcwould not find a voice in a respectable college newspaper. Katie Hornstein Rackham Just when you thought he had stepped out of the political arena for good, Al Gore has made a roaring come- back - and this time, he's gone Hollywood. The 2000 presidential candidate headlines a documentary about his pre- and post- Washington career titled "An Inconvenient Truth." And the truth Gore tells is that while America is a major contributor to the rapidly decaying atmosphere, the government has been negligent in creating any significant attempts to curb air pollution. While Gore's expectation that his docu- mentary will inspire national interest in pollution and global warming may be too ambitious, the message the movie sends is right on target: The growing pollution prob- lem - what he calls a "planetary emer- gency" - must be addressed. America is perfectly capable of using its resources to control its emission of harmful gases and to work with other nations to keep the planet healthy for future generations. But alas, money and denial stand in the way of employing such capabilities. As the nation with the highest gross domestic product per capita and also the highest emission of greenhouse gases in the world, America has still been unwilling to designate more monetary resources to fight air pollution. No amount of evidence has managed to convince the Bush administra- tion that the benefits of signing onto envi- ronmental initiatives - namely the Kyoto Protocol - outweigh the economic costs. The Kyoto Protocol was developed by the United Nations in 1997 and signed by 165 nations, committing them to reducing harmful gas emissions and participating in emission trading. The protocol has been projected to cut gas emissions by 29 percent by the year 2010. While then-Vice President Gore signed the protocol, it was only a sym- bolic gesture of dedication to work on creat- ing safer air in our country. Only when the protocol is ratified by the individual nations does it come into effect - and America and Australia are the only nations who have not joined in ratifying the agreement. The rea- son Bush has given for refusing to accept this protocolis thatit is not economically efficient andthe lackofparticipation fromdeveloping nations could put economic strain on Amer- ica. However, the government has taken no alternative steps and remains unresponsive to growing environmental threats. The second roadblock - denial - is a little harder to overcome. Despite consider- able data demonstrating that carbon diox- ide levels have risen by up to30 percent in the earth's atmosphere and the significant evidence that this increase has led to global warming, some people are still not will- ing to accept that steps need to be taken to reverse this trend. Most notably, the Competitive Enterprise Institute is opposed to further governmen- tal restriction of CO2 emission levels. The institute, which refers to CO2 as "lighting up our lives" produced commercials opposing political initiatives to restrict its emissions, saying, "Carbon Dioxide. They call it pol- lution. We call it life." The Bush adminis- tration has also had its doubts that cutting greenhouse-gas emissions will lead to any significant environmentalimpact - it paints global warming as junk science. In 2002, President Bush outrightly rejected the notion that human activity, such as increased auto- mobile use, contributed to climate changes. While speculation that global warming and gas emissions have contributed to the recent slew of natural disasters and unsea- sonable weather all over the world is as of yet unproven, it's hard to deny that such a rapid increase in emissions is negatively affecting our environment. Scientific evi- dence shows that average temperatures are projected to rise as much as 10 degrees Fahrenheit by the turn of the next century. It's a shame that environmental action is a partisan issue. Democrats and Republicans both breathe the same air, and only if the federal government steps in to combat rap- idly increasing greenhouse gas emissions will we maintain an ample supply of fresh air for everyone to breathe. America cannot simply rely on state governments and grass- roots initiatives to combat rapidly increas- ing greenhouse gas emissions. While it may not make immediate economic sense, money won't matter when there is no more fresh air. And, as Al Gore eludes to in his documentary, recent natural disasters may only be the beginning of whattmother Earth is capable of doing. Kennelly can be reached at thenelly@umich.edu. The good fight JARED GOLDBERG IF NOT NoW, WIHEN? D uring my freshman year, Il remember reading about online "blogs" that many people - journalists and others - were post- ing on. Some were political, some were personal; some were boring, and some were fascinating. When I discovered that I could sign up to have my very own, I jumped at the chance. Over the next several years, my views, and thus the content on my blog, have changed, sometimes slightly, other times dramatically. But never in my wildest dreams did I ever think my blog would get me into trouble. Our country's high school students, however, may not be so lucky. In Libertyville, Ill., the local school board recently voted unanimously in favor of a measure that would require students involved in extra-curricular activities to sign a contract stating that any "illegal or inappropriate behavior" posted on blogs and websites can be grounds for disciplin- ary action by the school. Although administrators will not ran- domly look at student websites, they will look in if a "concerned" student, parent or other individual informs them of ques- tionable material. As questionable as this policy is itself, it is not the only example of a school overstepping its bounds and punishing students for exercising their First Amendment rights off of school grounds and during their own time. In 1988, the Supreme Court ruled in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier that public high school newspapers do not have a right to free press if the news- paper receives funding from the school it serves. With the advent of blogs, students who have become victims to censoring administrators have found blogs them- selves to be a useful alternative. After the student newspaper of Peb- blebrook High School in Cobb Coun- ty, Ga. was shut down due to "budget cuts" in May 2005, concerned students, alleging censorship, started their own blog in protest. In a letter to the superintendent of the district, Joseph Redden, the staffers stat- ed: "The paper has been well received by the students and staff, but our most recent edition was not received favor- ably by the Pebblebrook administration. Their negative reaction was in response to the fact that the front page article pro- filed two students who were facing the upcoming difficulties of being mothers and students simultaneously." The editorial benefit gainedby student bloggers notwithstanding, the opportu- nity for them to criticize school officials has some high school administrators banning student blogging on school computers altogether. But the most heinous censorship of stu- dent bloggers occurred once again in Illi- nois. A student, disgruntled atdisciplinary policies of his high school, posted criti- cisms on his Xanga site: "I feel threatened by you, I can't even have a public webpage without you bullying me and telling me what has to be removed. Where is this freedom of speech that this government is sworn to uphold? ... None of us ever put in our Xangas that we were going to kill or bring harm to any one. We voiced our opinions. You are the real threat here. You are depriving us of our right to learn," the student wrote on May 2. He was suspended for 10 days, and now faces expulsion. The lesson that these students are learning, unfortunately, should make any civics or government teacher cringe. Dis- sent is not to be tolerated. Conform, do as you are told and do not cause a ruckus. The Columbine massacre was to student rights what Sept. 11 was to American civil liberties. In the name of safety and securi- ty, we are being robbed of the fundamental freedoms and conventions that democratic, liberal societies are supposed to enjoy. We shouldn't be surprised. School administra- tors are simply following the examples set forth by President Bush. Ask Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame what happens when you dissent to Bush's grand plans. Our children are supposed to be the inheritors of democracy, not totalitari- anism. What starts out as the censoring of morally explicit material on a blog by high school administrators can quickly escalate into the squashing of dissent of those same destructive policies. To all the student bloggers out there, I say keep fighting the good fight. Now you understand what the First Amend- ment is all about: It is not about creat- ing an army of robots who all agree. It is about the single voice of dissent. Goldberg can be reached at jaredgo@umich.edu.