Page 235 - Privacy in a Cyber Age Policy and Practice

NOTES 223

85. Keith Alexander, as quoted in “Clear and Present Danger: Cyber-Crime;
Cyber-Espionage; Cyber-Terror; and Cyber-War,” Aspen Security Forum,
July 18, 2013, http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/speeches_testimonies/
GEN_A_Aspen_Security_Forum_Transcript_18_Jul_2013.pdf.
86. Ron Nixon, “U.S. Postal Service Logging All Mail for Law Enforcement,” The
New York Times, July 3, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/us/
monitoring-of-snail-mail.html?pagewanted=all.
87. The data retention policies of the U.S. telecommunication giants vary from
company to company and depending on the type of information. In 2011, the
ACLU of North Carolina obtained through a FOIA request a chart created by
the Department of Justice that details how long six major cellular service provid-
ers kept their data. Cell tower information was kept on a rolling one-year basis
by Verizon; for 18 to 24 months by Sprint; and indefinitely since 2008 by AT&T.
In contrast, the content of text messages was not retained at all by four of the
companies, and kept for 3 to 5 days by Verizon and 90 days by Virgin Mobile
(but only accessible to law enforcement with a warrant). See Allie Bohm, “How
Long Is Your Cell Phone Company Hanging On To Your Data?” American Civil
Liberties Union, September 28, 2011, http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-
liberty/how-long-your-cell-phone-company-hanging-your-data. Similarly, on
Washington Week with Gwen Ifill, Pete Williams said that, “the phone companies
only keep this data for 30 to 90 days. They don’t have any reason. There’s no busi-
ness reason for the phone company to keep six-month old phone records. So
they throw it away. Unless the government gets it, it’s not going to keep it.” See
Pete Williams as quoted in “‘Transcript,’ Washington Week with Gwen Ifill,” June
7, 2013, http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/watch/transcript/39902.
88. Mike Rogers, ‘“This Week” Transcript: Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rep. Mike Rogers,”
ABC This Week, June 9, 2013, http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-
sen-dianne-feinstein-rep-mike-rogers/story?id=19343314&page=4#.
Udsm2jtilJl.
89. Legal Information Institute, “Fourth Amendment,” Cornell University Law
School, http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fourth_amendment.
90. American Civil Liberties Union “ACLU Motion for Preliminary Injunc-
tion in ACLU v Clapper,” (2013): 4, https://www.aclu.org/national-security/
aclu-v-clapper-legal-documents.
91. Eve Brensike Primus, “Disentangling Administrative Searches,” Columbia
Law Review 111 (2011): 256, http://www.columbialawreview.org/wp-content/
uploads/2011/03/111-2_Primus.pdf.
92. Ibid., 263.
93. Illinois v. Lidster, 540 U.S. 419, 427 (2004).
94. See Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz, 110 S. Ct. 2481 (1990).
95. See: United States v. Hartwell, 436 F.3d 174, 180 (3d Cir. Pa. 2006); and Elec-
tronic Privacy Information Center v. United States Department of Homeland
Security, 653 F.3d 1, 10–11 (D.C. Cir. 2011).
96. Primus, “Disentangling Administrative Searches,” 263–64.
97. Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. at 455.
98. Ibid., 451.