Trump’s “Cloud Act” Unleashes Rights Abuse Hellstorm

Rider on spending bill guts civil liberties worldwide

By
Jim W. Dean and Gordon Duff
-
7
3276

 

President Trump on Friday prevented another government shutdown by signing a $1.3 trillion federal spending bill. Nestled within the 2,200-page document was a controversial act, revolutionizing the way the government handles data.

The CLOUD act was passed without much fanfare. The controversial legislation has been described by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) as both sinister and dangerous. It deals with the manner in which the US government can access data, needed for law enforcement operations on United States citizens, that is stored on overseas servers.

The legislation was tacked onto the mammoth spending bill on Wednesday night. It also changes the way foreign governments can request information on their citizens from US tech firms.



Previously the law required the government to have mutual legal-assistance treaties with their foreign counterparts. These governments would then contact tech giants with law enforcement requests directly without using the department of justice as an intermediary.

 

Tech companies could, if they so wished, resist these requests. The CLOUD act strips away a layer of judicial review which critics feel gives too much power to the executive branch. It is the executive branch that decides which governments have access to information.

In other words the president can, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) “enter into “executive agreements” with foreign governments that would allow each government to acquire users’ data stored in the other country, without following each other’s privacy laws.”

Detractors say that this action will allow countries with questionable human-rights records to access information on their citizens without needing a warrant. Let’s say for the sake of argument Saudi Arabia enters into an executive agreement with America. As US based internet companies host the majority of internet traffic, Saudi Arabia could wiretap a Saudi citizen located anywhere on earth without any of the safeguards put in place by US law. Saudi Arabia would not need a warrant to do so or even notify the US government that they are monitoring the Saudi citizen. The same is true of any country that has signed an “executive agreement” with the US.

 

“US and foreign police will have new mechanisms to seize data across the globe. Because of this failure, your private emails, your online chats, your Facebook, Google, Flickr photos, your Snapchat videos, your private lives online, your moments shared digitally between only those you trust, will be open to foreign law enforcement without a warrant and with few restrictions on using and sharing your information,” the EFF wrote in a blog post.

Despite opposition from various civil liberties groups and privacy advocates the act received broad bipartisan party support, big tech companies such as Microsoft also welcome the CLOUD act’s passing. “Today is an important day for privacy rights around the world, for international relations, and for building trust in the technology we all rely on every day,” Microsoft President Brad Smith wrote in a statement.

 

ATTENTION READERS

We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

7 COMMENTS

  1. I’m curious to know the name, or names of those who actually wrote this into the bill. Who originated it, who’s idea was it? And the noose tightens.

  2. Whatever happened to the policy–foisted by Republicans–that prospective legislation would undergo a thorough review of 72 hours before deliberation and enactment–to allow ordinary citizens and those affected some period of suggestions or concerns being raised??

    • once again, it’s the devil in the details (those stinking RIDERS) that do us in….can’t we just have simple budget passed w/o adding all the periphery??

  3. This is why the Supreme Court should be required to rule on every new law before it is enforced not after it may have been illegally and unconstitutionally enforced for decades or centuries. The current and long archaic procedure is insane. We must get rid of lying lawyers for ordinary citizens making these important decisions. Lying lawyers have destroyed this country. Lying lawyers have hi jacked our whole government. They dominate all three branches. Even though Trump is not a lawyer he is smothered by them around him. Bush and Slick were both lying lawyers. There are no checks and balances in our totally corrupt government. Lawyers are the only group taught to lie and cheat in school.

    • Our totally corrupt Supreme Court has sat on its rear end for over two centuries and not even ruled on the meaning of the phrase “natural born citizen”! What a disgusting expletive deleted disgrace. Fire these expletive deleted corrupt jerks.

    • SCOTUS will only rely on the deliberations of Congress, and revert to its review of any legislation, unless it is patently unconstitutional in its application or against precedent…in other words, if you don’t like it, have the law changed. SCOTUS is wavering on the line of a Living or Traditional Constitution…

Comments are closed.