Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
I think constitutional protections are intended to protect citizens from the State, not from each other. It was the government that was in violation of the 4th amendment, not the telcos.

Protecting citizens from each other is the purpose of US Code (federal statutes) and states' criminal codes.

But if I were an atty and corporate counsel, I would indeed argue ;) that as a corporation is a "person" the state has abridged corp 4th Am. and due process "rights".

I'm not, and that complaint, XYZ Inc v. US, didn't get filed. AFAIK. (Search ACLU and epic.org, for example)

Besides 1st Am questions, blocked by evocation of federal "national security" perogatives, litigants have been unsuccessful demonstrating material harm, provoked by unreasonable search. That is the plaintiff, individual or corporate, must exhibit a loss which may be financial or corporal directly attributable to the undue process.

And what incentives are available to corporations to post revenue losses --as if consumer preference among suppliers existed and were actionable -- attributable to unreasonable US searches of its customers' transactions?

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Thu Jun 26th, 2008 at 12:26:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series