Home » Confidentiality » Attorneys’ Fear of Eavesdropping Insufficient to Confer Standing

Attorneys’ Fear of Eavesdropping Insufficient to Confer Standing

Source |2017-06-26T18:38:22+00:00Jul 9th, 2007|Categories: LegalEthics, Post|Tags: , |Comments Off on Attorneys’ Fear of Eavesdropping Insufficient to Confer Standing

The Sixth Circuit, in a panel decision with three separate opinions, on July 6, 2007 held that plaintiff attorneys who feared that their e-mail and telephone conversations were being intercepted pursuant to the infamous “Terrorist Surveillance Program” lacked standing to challenge the constitutionality of this program.  ACLU v. Nat’l Sec. Agency, __ F.3d __ (6th Cir. July 2007).  The 65-pages of opinion are hard to condense, but in the majority’s view, the only way you have standing to challenge an unconstitutional surveillance program is to show that your rights, in fact, have been violated.  Given that the government won’t say who it’s monitoring…