Hacker News Reader

Comment by rayiner | Hacker News Reader

This is really wonderful work by the EFF. Legal opinions are not dangerous. They don't disclose the locations of undercover agents or anything like that. It's a contempt to the legal profession to keep them secret so that their reasoning cannot be scrutinized by courts. A lawyer's job is to make the best possible argument for her client's position, but if the court says she's wrong--and it's within the court's sole provenance to say what the law is--then she must acquiesce.

View on HN

> The U.S. Department of Justice today filed a motion to dismiss its appeal of a ruling over legal opinions about Section 215 of the Patriot Act, the controversial provision of law relied on by the NSA to collect the call records of millions of Americans. As a result of the dismissal, the Justice Department will be forced to release a previously undisclosed opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) concerning access by law enforcement and intelligence agencies to census data under Section 215.

By the government backing out, it _doesn't_ set legal precedent for the release or prevention of secret ruling. They lost a battle to continue the war.

If this can be iterated, then the good guys will win.

Congress can introduce bullshit faster than EFF can fix it, so no – this process does not converge to anything good.

Sometimes I wonder if the government should be required to follow all cases through to a court ruling, so that precedent can be established when appropriate.

Yes and no; There are already some rules governing case abandonment but we definitely don't need a government obligated to follow through every fool action it initiates.

If you have the time, could you elaborate on those rules? I know nothing about that field, but am very curious.

> Legal opinions are not dangerous.

They are dangerous for those who prefer to keep society in the dark about their questionable practices.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com