Yahoo: Gov’t Threatened $250,000-A-Day Fine Over NSA

FILE - This file photo made June 7, 2010, shows a sign for Yahoo! in New York. Investors are running up the price of Yahoo shares Thursday, Oct. 14, 2010, after a report saying AOL and a group of private equity firms... FILE - This file photo made June 7, 2010, shows a sign for Yahoo! in New York. Investors are running up the price of Yahoo shares Thursday, Oct. 14, 2010, after a report saying AOL and a group of private equity firms may bid for the Web company. (AP Photo/Mark Lennihan, file) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

WASHINGTON (AP) — Yahoo said Thursday the government threatened to fine the company $250,000 a day if it did not comply with demands to go along with an expansion of U.S. surveillance by surrendering online information, a step the company regarded as unconstitutional.

The outlines of Yahoo’s secret and ultimately unsuccessful court fight against government surveillance emerged when a federal judge ordered the unsealing of some material about Yahoo’s court challenge.

In a statement, Yahoo said the government amended a law to demand user information from online services, prompting a challenge in 2007 during the George W. Bush administration.

“Our challenge, and a later appeal in the case, did not succeed,” Yahoo general counsel Ron Bell said in a statement.

The new material about the case underscores “how we had to fight every step of the way to challenge the U.S. government’s surveillance efforts,” Bell added. “At one point, the U.S. government threatened the imposition of $250,000 in fines per day if we refused to comply.”

Bell said the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court upheld the predecessor to Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act. Section 702 refers to the program called PRISM, which gave the government access to online communications by users of Yahoo.

Former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden disclosed the program last year.

Yahoo said it is committed to protecting users’ data and that it will continue to contest requests and laws that it considers unlawful, unclear or overly broad.

“We consider this an important win for transparency, and hope that these records help promote informed discussion about the relationship between privacy, due process and intelligence gathering,” said Bell.

The newly released documents show that the Bush administration was taking a hard line and was miffed that Yahoo had even been allowed to get into court with its complaint.

In sum, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court erred in permitting Yahoo to challenge the directives, said a court brief signed by then-U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey.

Yahoo was arguing that what the Bush administration was doing violated the Fourth Amendment rights of customers of Yahoo.

“The government has conducted warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance for decades, and such surveillance has been upheld under the Fourth Amendment by every appellate court to decide the question,” Mukasey wrote.

“The government’s implementation of the Protect America Act is consistent with decades of past practice and adequately protects the privacy of U.S. persons,” said Mukasey.

In its court papers, Yahoo urged that the government be reined in.

Yahoo requested that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review reverse the lower court’s judgment and find that “the surveillance authorized by the directives is not ‘otherwise lawful,'” wrote Marc Zwillinger, a lawyer representing the Internet service provider.

Yahoo lost the battle in the surveillance review court.

In a statement Thursday night, the Obama administration said it is “even more protective” of the rights of U.S. citizens than the law upheld by the review court.

The American Civil Liberties Union said the case shows the need for more openness about government surveillance.

“The secrecy that surrounds these court proceedings prevents the public from understanding our surveillance laws,” said ACLU staff attorney Patrick Toomey. “Today’s release only underscores the need for basic structural reforms to bring transparency to the NSA’s surveillance activities.”

____

AP Technology Writer Michael Liedtke in San Francisco contributed to this report.

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. OK, here’s an idea on how to break this without breaking it -

    Keep gov’t in negotiations until your next quarterly financial report where you take a charge for the $250K x days in the quarter. Report it as an anticipated government penalty with no further info. Wall St uproar couldn’t be stopped, and you revealed nothing confidential, everyone else gets to go to town on this.

    I think it could work.

  2. Avatar for dave48 dave48 says:

    Well if it happened in 2007 it must have been Obama’s fault. Seriously, is there a reason the year these cases occurred is always buried in the story somewhere because I think the headline gives entirely the wrong impression.

  3. A lot of really bad things transpired after Bush the Puppet was installed.
    You have to wonder how long Cheney and his boys had been salivating and waiting for their opportunity. Did they get up every morning and decide what part of America they could destroy next? I hope they heard my many fuck yous regarding them while they were listening in and still do.

    Yes the NSA is completely out of hand and things tended to peak after Bush slinked out of town. Barack has to once again rebalance what he did not throw out of wack.

  4. Avatar for zota zota says:

    I know, right? The way they talk about it, you’d almost think this stuff was only revealed in the last year or so.

  5. Avatar for meta meta says:

    Good publicity for Yahoo! Video at 11.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for leftflank Avatar for dave48 Avatar for zota Avatar for suicide_arsonist Avatar for meta

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: