It's where to order amoxicillin also not known whether the drug passes into breast milk zofran for sale or how it may affect a child who's breastfed. These cheap cialis no prescription medications are the first-line treatment choice for disseminated tuberculosis treatment clomid no prescription in the absence of a drug resistance health history. Further vibramycin sale research in humans is necessary before experts can be sure buy cream side effects work this is the underlying cause of myopathy. These bumps can buy cheapest griseofulvin appear clustered together and typically affect large areas of the cheapest clomid arms, torso, or legs — including the back of the glyburide online knee. The absence of warnings or other information for a alesse (ovral l) for sale given drug does not indicate that the drug or drug find discount viagra online combination is safe, effective, or appropriate for all patients or all.

A year and a half ago I blogged about the case of Steven Warshak, whose email the US government had obtained without a search warrant. At that point the opinion of the court was that no warrant was needed to obtain your email from your ISP. The reasoning was a bit like the original court view of telephone wiretapping–no warrant needed, since after all, what did you think was going to happen to your conversation once it left the confines of your house?

A US court of appeals has now held that the government needs a search warrant to get your email. “Given the fundamental similarities between email and traditional forms of communication,” the court writes, “it would defy common sense to afford emails lesser Fourth Amendment protection.” The court has elected to go with common sense. Bad people do a lot of bad stuff by email, but there is no reason why investigators shouldn’t have to take the same steps to justify their searches they would have to do to open postal mail or listen in on a phone call.

Read the EFF’s announcement, which has a link to the decision.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 15th, 2010 at 10:14 am and is filed under Privacy, The role of government—laws and regulations. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.