Judge Dismisses Challenge to NSA Internet Surveillance

A California District Court judge on Tuesday dismissed part of a legal challenge to the National Security Agency's controversial surveillance of Internet communications, dealing a setback to the post-Snowden movement to limit the government's dragnet spying regime.

The court could not rule whether the NSA's collection of Internet and phone content under a program known as Upstream violates the Fourth Amendment's protection from unreasonable search and seizures, Judge Jeffrey White ruled in a 10-page decision. Moreover, the arguments against the NSA's program raised by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital-rights group, aren't factually correct, White, a George W. Bush appointee, said.

But just precisely what details from EFF about the NSA's Internet surveillance are inaccurate was not clear in White's opinion, which invoked national security to claim that he could not provide a clearer assessment of the facts of the case.

"The Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to proffer sufficient admissible evidence to support standing on their claim for a Fourth Amendment violation of interference with their Internet communications," White wrote. "In addition, without disclosing any of the classified content ... the Court can confirm that the Plaintiffs' version of the significant operational details of the Upstream collection process is substantially inaccurate."

In addition, White said that EFF lacked legal standing to present its case "regarding the possible interception of their Internet communications."

"The Court is frustrated by the prospect of deciding the current motions without full public disclosure of the Court's analysis and reasoning," White wrote. "However, it is a necessary by-product of the types of concerns raised by this case. Although partially not accessible to the Plaintiffs or the public, the record contains the full materials reviewed by the Court. The Court is persuaded that its decision is correct both legally and factually and furthermore is required by the interests of national security."

Top-secret information about the NSA's surveillance of Internet communications was exposed publicly by Edward Snowden disclosures, which began in 2013.

The case before the District Court, Jewel v. NSA, was filed in 2008 by EFF on behalf of AT&T customer Carolyn Jewel. The case took on renewed importance in the wake of the Snowden leaks and was amended to include those revelations, as published in The Guardian and other newspapers.

In a statement, EFF vowed to continue its legal challenges to NSA surveillance.

"EFF will keep fighting the unlawful, unconstitutional surveillance of ordinary Americans by the U.S. government," Kurt Opsahl, deputy general counsel at EFF, said in a statement. "Today's ruling in Jewel v. NSA was not a declaration that NSA spying is legal. The judge decided instead that 'state secrets' prevented him from ruling whether the program is constitutional."

Correction: An earlier version of this story had misstated the scope of the court decision. The judge in this case did not rule specifically against the merits of the plantiff's case or on the legality of the NSA program.