There's plenty of anger to go around, but my understanding is that it's more productive to direct your efforts at legislators who approved the bad laws and the executives who take full opportunity to abuse them -- and not the judges who have a narrow role in this whole saga.<p>For example, if you live in California, perhaps you could call Dianne Feinstein, who when asked about this program today said, "It's called protecting America."
A bill of impeachment has to be filed in the House of Representatives. The White House has nothing to do with this.
This petition is a waste of time. If you're upset, try to convince your Congressman.
Is the judge really so at fault at this? Serious question - do they have right to refuse approval under current legislation and can the administration just judge shop until they find a more susceptible judge?
I had put up a similar petition here, which targets more widespread change: <a href="https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/cease-overbroad-surveillance-american-people/sMfwGWX5" rel="nofollow">https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/cease-overbroad-su...</a><p>The more signatures on both, the better the chance of an official response.
Until you can overcome the R and D machines and convince the 20% of people who vote stupidly to do something different other than pull the straight party lever nothing will ever change. You can also forget about civil war or something like that as they have nailed before you even think about it.
So much press and attention on this today, when James Bramford surfaced even more intrusive and comprehensive `See Clearly, Act Quickly' surveillance in his 2008 book Shadow Factory. That's now five years ago.
I seriously don't get why people would ever submit their information to wh.gov. It's like you are adding yourself to Obama's enemy list. I'm sure Obama is going to overturn a spy program he signs off just because some rabble rousers signed an online form. The US constitution is dead. He doesn't give a damn.