In a stunning dudebro reversal that caused twee mustaches nationwide to go limp from ennui yesterday, a federal judge in Manhattan ruled that the NSA’s mass surveillance tactics are legal after all:
WASHINGTON — A federal judge in New York on Friday ruled that the National Security Agency’s program that is systematically keeping phone records of all Americans is lawful, creating a conflict among lower courts and increasing the likelihood that the issue will be resolved by the Supreme Court.
Astute observers will recall that just a couple of weeks back, US District Court Judge Richard Leon ruled that it was probably unconstitutional for the NSA to indiscriminately hoover up millions of phone records.
If this does reach the Supreme Court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor will bear watching. At age 59, Sotomayor is most emphatically an Old who probably relies on her nieces and nephews to set up her iPhone and establish interconnectivity for home entertainment devices.
Over the recent holiday break, it’s entirely possible that Sotomayor joined fellow Boomer dinosaurs in causing Millennial eyerolls around the Christmas table with cloud-shouting comments about The Twitter and admonitions to the Youngs about posting candid photos to The Facebook.
This is a safe assumption since Sotomayor’s legal rulings reveal a profound ignorance about today’s reality, i.e., there is no privacy because Internet, and anyone who insists that there should be is: a) old, b) dumb, or c) both old and dumb:
“It may be necessary to reconsider the premise that an individual has no reasonable expectation of privacy in information voluntarily disclosed to third parties,” Sotomayor wrote in 2012. “This approach is ill suited to the digital age, in which people reveal a great deal of information about themselves to third parties in the course of carrying out mundane tasks.”
Lumber off to the tar pit, already, old woman! Government agents aren’t hacking into your computer to spy on your LOLcats!
Anyhoo, this Robed Anachronism may soon have another opportunity to argue that a 1979 ruling involving a phone company and its ne’er-do-well customer isn’t sufficient to manage privacy expectations on Planet Cloud, with profound implications for the sanctity of LOLcats and pØrn stashes (as opposed to pØrn ‘staches) throughout the world.