our subject tonight is the aclu. it has been involved as we have seen in some of the most important and contentious cases and events since world war i. its influence is seen everywhere at the staple, it is one of the most polarizing nongovernmental organizations we have to be a card carrying member of the aclu, it's a badge of honor for some, a banl of something quite different for others. it's going to be impossible for us to explore all of that history and all of the cases. there's way too much, but i would like to at least trite to demystify a little bit what this organization is, talk a little bit about how it makes decisions and how it goes about picking things it gets involved in as well as some of the cases themselves. the idea here is to have a freewheeling discussion that i will lead. no speeches, no opening statements. i've encouraged everyone and i've been able to get in touch with all of them beforehand. i'm just encouraging everyone to jump in to feel free to pick up on one another's comments, disagree, a

my subject tonight is the aclu. it has been involved as we have seen in some of the most important and contentious cases an events since world war i. it influence the seen everywhere. at the same time it is one of the most polarizing non-governmental organizations we have. to be a card-carrying member of the aclu as a badge of honor for some. a badge of something different from others. it is going to be impossible to explore all of that history and all of the cases. there is too much. i would like to demystify what disorganization is. talk a little bit about how it makes decisions and goes about picking things it gets involved in as well as some of the cases themselves. the idea here is to have a free-wheeling discussion that i will lead. no speeches or opening statements. i have been able to get in touch with all of them before hand and encouraging everyone to jump in, feel free to pickup on one another's comments. disagree or agree, bring up cases you think are important and remind us what those cases are about bec

and i applaud the aclu for taking on a democratic administration. many of the traditional allies of a democratic administration have gone silent on the challenges posed by the continuing war on terror. so, i think they've shown themselves to be very principled and they are raising important questions. but there is a discourse out there that criticizes the growth of so-called law fare, that we are imposing on a war context too much of a due process paradigm that is simply inappropriate. the parallel, i would say, in a domestic context, mr. shapiro mentions the issue of, well, we all want to, you know, support economically people on the street. and that's true. i think that they are using the courts as a surrogate for making social and economic policy. and courts are not good at trading off competing interests. so, if they get an order that says, for instance, on prison litigation, that we have to spend x amount on prisoner's rights, that may be perfectly defensible in the abstract. but it ignores the fact that public bodies have to make trade-offs of

just like the aclu. and, by the way, the naacp, also an amicus brief in that case. and so i thought -- and i think the question relates to what the aclu has done subsequently with respect to contributions. i don't think you've changed position with respect to expenditures by organizations that happen to be formed into a corporation. nonprofit corporation, small business corporation, hardware store corporation. >> press corporation. >> "the new york times" corporation, bless its heart, is -- has written maybe 22,000 editorials against the citizens united case. maybe it's fewer than that. and one of the things "the new york times" says in its editorials about that is that it's just wrong that corporations have these constitutional rights. overlooking the fact that "the new york times" versus sullivan is one of the leading cases in the fermement of the aclu and everyone else that believes in freedom of the press and so forth. so, it's a complicated issue. i could go on and on about citizens united, because i thought that the principle that was being vindicated there wa

her subject tonight is the aclu. it has been involved in some of the most contentious cases since world war i. at the same time, it is one of the most polarizing nongovernmental organizations we have. a card-carrying member of the aclu is a badge of honor for some and not for others. i would like the least tried to demystify a little bit of what this organization is, in part how it goes about making decisions as well as some of the cases themselves. the idea is to have a free- wheeling discussion that i will lead. no speeches. in opening statements. -- no opening statements. i would discourage everyone to jump in, to feel free to pick up on one another's comments, agree or disagree. and remind us briefly what those cases are about. onward. the briefest of introductions, i want to get everybody involved really quickly. we need to go the extra step and explain. even among friends of mine and family members of my, when we defend the civil rights of the homophobic, disgusting reactionary christian minister to mao funeral

>> guest: the aclu as believed for some time that police departments around the country are tracking people's cell phones on a routine basis often without getting a warrant based on probable cause. that's what we thought, but we weren't actually sure. and so in august 35 aclu affiliates in 32 states around the country filed a total of just over 380 public records with different law enforcement agencies asking for information about their policies, procedures and practices for tracking cell phones. and the report we put out earlier this month documented the findings from that study. >> host: and what did can you find? >> guest: we found that virtually all law enforcement agencies who responded to our request engage in cell phone tracking, that is, in fact, now a completely routine sur sail lance -- surveillance tool that's just common in law enforcement agencies' arsenals. and moreover, we found frequently law enforcement agencies track the location of cell phones without getting a warrant based on probable cause, and that's of concern to the aclu because where you go can reveal a great

her subject tonight is the aclu. it has been involved in some of the most contentious cases since world war i. at the same time, it is one of the most polarizing nongovernmental organizations we have. anyway, i am glad to be here. her subject tonight is the aclu. it has been involved in some of the most contentious cases since world war i. at the same time, it is one of the most polarizing nongovernmental organizations we have. a card-carrying member of the aclu is a badge of honor for some and not for others. i would like the least tried to demystify a little bit of what this organization is, in part how it goes about making decisions as well as some of the cases themselves. the idea is to have a free- wheeling discussion that i will lead. no speeches. in opening statements. -- no opening statements. i would discourage everyone to jump in, to feel free to pick up on one another's comments, agree or disagree. and remind us briefly what those cases are about. onward. the briefest of introductions, i want to get everybo

[laughter] half a lot of the work that the aclu has done -- >> a lot of the work that the aclu has done has gone a long way. the foil litigation used to be done more because we were richer. the aclu has taken on their role that we should still be doing -- clinics popping up in places like yale law school which is a measure of how much less of an economic engine the presse is. on this question about drones and killing people, it is right in the war paradigm. before the soldier shoot, he does not have to get a warrant. but if the attorney general is going to invoke the concept of due process and then redefine , i do think you want to stop and active -- and ask if that is due process to you. it does seem to be the presentation of evidence, the ability to counter that evidence, a neutral party, perhaps a lawyer representing to you. some kind of testing of the evidence. i would think that in a setting where it can be judged by the public, to see if our government is doing the things they want them to be doing through some kind of paradigm that sounds like with the attorney general is talking

the question you have to ask yourself what would american life be like without aclu? and one didn't exist, would america be the worst for it? and i know that the answer in my mind is, yes. america would be worse for it, if we didn't exist. we'd have to create one. and even if you never supported us or believe in our work, these issues are much too weighty to be silent bystanders. if we do anything right it is just to get kind of the far republican right wing part of america saying, well, what is the aclu doing advocating on behalf of citizens united states? get they are light bulbs to sparkle and see, how can i possibly agree with the aclu on this issue? that maybe there's a teachable moment for all of is and that american life is all the better when we have these debates, that democracy can about great many thing, but it should never be quiet and our job is to be as loud and noisy as possible. so thank you to jeffrey and to all of you for joining us. >> let me, i said at the beginning, this is a huge subject along the way it became clear every one of these issues we c

the aclu despite the fact that this provision in the bill of rights, the aclu did not take a position on whether it was the right that private citizens enjoy it all. the acru was actively involved in the heller case, in the mcdonald case, filing briefs to show that from the standpoint of original meaning, that the fifth amendment is the right of law-abiding and peaceful citizens to keep and bear firearms for the protection. >> when was it formed, the acru? >> the acru was formed about a decade and a half ago by bob carlson from the reagan administration. and with the policy board comprised of a number of heavyweights from the reagan administration like former u.s. attorney general ed meese. >> now, you have code written two books with ken blackwell, former secretary of state, do you have a third book? do you have another one were to write a? >> we are talking about the idea. there are a number of offers that have been made and we're weighing our options right now. >> ken klukowski is the co-author of "resurgent: how constitutional conservatism can save america." it's published by thre

again, the aclu is not opposed to the use of this technology. as others have mentioned, there are other valuable uses. if we can think through these things at the outset, everyone will be better off. >> well, i think two points. the first one, picking up on the very last question, is that i think the right answer here is developing the right systems. static rules about privacy or ution will be overtaken as the rules about safety. and we tried to address internet usage with a concrete set of rules and all of a sudden, big daddy is flooding around the ramparts of privacy concerns. i don't know what the answer is going to be in terms of dropse drones because i don't know where the drones will be. the answer is system to system to system oversight. the other point i would make is ken, if you fly your drone over my house, i'm shooting it dune. >> counter measures. >> just like any technology, there are benefits that out-weigh the downside. i have confidence it will all work out. >> thank you all for coming. [applause] >> this year's student cam compe

the aclu is a provision and the bill of rights they did not take a position if it was a private citizens but a.c. are you is active in the macdonald case to show was second amendment is from law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms formed about a decade ago from the reagan administration policy board with heavyweights like the former u.s. attorney general. >>host: you have co written other books with ken blackwell. is there another one? >> we are talking about it. a number of offers have been made. >>host: ken klukowski the author of "resurgent: how constitutional conservatism can save america" published by threshold. this is a booktv ad liberty university. >>host: "john f. kennedy: the new frontier president" published by nova of publishers and professor david snead terror of history department at liberty university is the author. what is the series of books? >> this is a serious started about six years ago the general reader or students' college could turn to to get basic in permission on the president's. >>host: why are you writing about john f. kennedy? >> it started with my disser

the 72 sworn statements in the aclu's lawsuit paint a grim picture. slamming inmates' heads against the wall. dislocating an inmate's shoulder. and pressing a key into an inmate's arm, leaving puncture wounds. photos gathered by the aclu show gashes on inmates' foreheads, broken teeth, and bruising. >> it's huge. it's a huge problem. we get lots and lots of letters and phone calls from inmates themselves and family members. >> reporter: esther lim is jail monitor for the aclu and says she witnessed one of the beatings. while conducting a jail interview, she says she looked out the window and saw two deputies punching a nonresponsive inmate. >> and later they take out their taser and they tase this guy who is, again, not fighting, not moving, and he looks to me like he's not-- he's unconscious. >> reporter: at a press conference this week, l.a. county sheriff lee baca dispute allegations that he's not properly handling the alleged abuse. >> we are literally in a reformation of how we do business when it comes to the use of force. >> reporter: he said h

the aclu of pennsylvania took the position and this was never taken by the national aclu but took the position and was quite vigorously supported by important folks in the aclu at the time that caller id was an intensely from way of denying people free expression because it essentially meant that somebody couldn't get to you, and the caller id was a first amendment violation that the state telephone regulators shut eliminate because it eliminated the first amendment right you had to reach somebody and communicate speech to them. ten naturally in telemarketing calls leader -- [laughter] this attitude is inconceivable to anybody in this room and any person listening. that is our notions of privacy have shifted in remarkable ways including the notions of privacy from person-to-person, private person to private person. let me bring this to the point of drones and how they fit into this. one is on their own in relation to privacy, and second, as a sort of in a dollar to technology, and leveraging technology and combination with the sensors that catherine mentioned, the possibility of the f

a few days later i sat in the aclu's office. while a police internal investigator asked me to tell my story. that was another proud day for me because i knew that i had made a difference. although i still believe in the promise of equality, i know that i have to speak out to make sure it's a reality for me. my family and my community. no u.s. citizen should be made to feel like a criminal. simply because of the color of their skin, language abilities or religion. thank you. that's part of my story. >> hello. my name is elizabeth dann. i want to thank you for this incredible opportunity to speak to you all about what muslim students have been going through for the past few months. i am a convert to islam. i'm in my final year of law school at nyu. and i'm the outreach chair of nyu's muslim law students association. i'm many other things as well. i'm a descendent of english immigrants who arrived in this country prior to the revolutionary war and irish catholic immigrants, i'm a wife and an expectant mother. the racial profiling th

. >> so where does the aclu stand on this issue? itself but more about the policies and the way that the technology is used. certainly, there are very good uses if somebody is, for example, lost out on puget sound or up in the woods, we want to have whatever tools are available to find that person. our concern though is that it can go further. it can be used for purposes of surveillance even if that's not the intended reason initially. >> legally though, aren't the police departments prevented from using it in the ways that would concern the aclu, areas that would infringe on someone's privacy? we've even seen, for example, the issue of whether or not çg devices can be attached for people's cars for police work. just because it is police work does not make it as you know better thain, with the aclu, legal. >> that's absolutely correct. there could be lawsuits that come up if it is used for search purposes or if it violates people's privacy interests. absolutely. >> so right now, what is the aclu planning to do, the concerns that you

the aclu says the marine was within his rights to criticize the president. he hopes an online rant hoping the president will be beat in the polls. dick cheney made his first public appearance since getting a heart transplant. he addressed members of the wyoming republican party. he remains seated while speaking for more than one hour. observers say he appeared healthy. >> abc news has learned he will invoke his fifth amendment rights when he testifies before congress. he oversaw the training conference at a las vegas resort. they found the agency spent more than $800,000 on that even the lawn. >> five-year sector tragic campus shooting, former virginia tech students are honoring lives lost. they ran a five k this afternoon. it is called the 3.24 the 32 victims that died that day. most were on campus. one was shot the times. she was a runner and then years later a runner now. >> for the first month and a half i could not run or walk or do some of the normal things i took for granted. it is more of a reminder now that i a overcame. >> remembrances will take pl

how absurd the aclu reaction to caller id was 20 years after that. it is crazy we will anticipate the way we feel about this stuff once it is integrated into society. we cannot really anticipate it. tale is, hereary is a neat government program that did not try to anticipate it. it crashes and burns. view.mes around to paul's i am just wondering. is it realistic to think it through. is it something that, whatever judgments we come to today, sitting here in an faa rule making in congress, we will be your mother. 30 years from now, people will say, wasn't it quite that they thought drones -- quaint that they thought drones were x,y and z. >> there are no new questions. only the same questions over and over again. the concept of government abuse of a new technology is as old as harming the police. it probably has antecedents that go back to the first time anybody put somebody in charge of herding the tribe, or something like that. it seems to me that you can and should anticipate the potential for abuse. instead of relying on any deficiency and resources

the greeks of the aclu, really are read with care. i say that in a setting where the briefs are not read with care. you are lucky to make it brief. but i know in chambers on the liberal and conservative sides the handful of outside groups whose briefs get read among those would be the aclu because they are credible and trusted and that is a testament to a really smart legal show. >> last word? >> i will say this. i will thank everyone for joining us especially those who pushed back. you and ted. in your gentle, kind of way. i will just say this. for those of you who disagree with the aclu would never have given their time. incredibly generous to give your time this evening to comment and engage in discussions. those who wouldn't even the time of day and switch the channel off of c-span. i say this. the context of today's panel was the aclu and american life. the question is what one american life be without the aclu? what didn't exist if america was worse for it? the answer in my mind is america will be worse for it if it didn't exist.

the aclu says they are making money on the deal. the practice is so common that cell phone companies have manuals for police explains what data the companies store, how much they charge police to access that data, and what officers need to do to get it here is judge andrew napolitano. >> the principal is the same no matter what the police are seeking to invade whether it's your medical records, your legal records, your banking records, your cell phone records, or your computer records. if the government wants it, it needs a search warrant. if it gets it without a search warrant, it's committed a crime, a crime. >> laws vary from state to state, there is a bill in congress that would make getting a warrant to track a cell phone the law of the land. shep? >> shepard: of course a lot of police departments are saying look, this is about public safety. >> in fact, for a lot of police departments this has become a routine tool. remember, they are not listening in to your cell phone conversations. they're tracking the location of your cell

the aclu says they do this without permission and cops say this could save lives. is live in the west coast news hub. the people who wrote the report, trace, they claim the laws have not kept up with the technology. >>trace: well, and they say they need uniform laws on how the government tracks you and the aclu says the laws are in a state of chaos with different laws for different areas and some areas for law. there are some cell phone carriers that require a warrant or a court order before they give out police data but the aclu says and i quote, "the practice is so common that cell phone companies have manuals for police explaining what data the companies store and how were they charge the police to access the data and what officers need to do to get it." >>judge napolitano: the principle is the same for matter what the police are seeking tone said whether it is the medical records, your legal records or banking records or cell phone records or computer records. if the government wants it it needs a senator warrant. if it gets it without a certain warrant, they ha

how absurd the aclu reaction to caller id was 20 years after that. azy we will anticipate the way we feel about this stuff once it is integrated into society. we cannot really anticipate it. paul's cautionary tale is, here is a neat government program that did not try to anticipate it. it crashes and burns. ken comes around to paul's view. i am just wondering. is it realistic to think it through. is it something that, whatever judgments we come to today, sitting here in an faa rule making in congress, we will be your mother. 30 years from now, people will say, wasn't it quite that they thought drones -- quaint that they thought drones were x,y and z. >> there are no new questions. only the same questions over and over again. the concept of government abuse of a new technology is as old as harming the police. -- if arnubming the police. it probably has antecedents that go back to the first time anybody put somebody in charge of herding the tribe, or something like that. it seems to me that you can and should anticipate the potential for abuse. instead

call me. >> the aclu reached out to more than 380 state and local law enforcement agencies. out of more than 200 responses, ten say they don't track cell phones. in new york, jonathan hunt, fox news. >>> the capes crusader pops up again. but first, last night's election could oust a well known name. details on the election that is still too close to call.  [ male announcer ] a car is either luxury or it isn't. if you want a luxury car with a standard power moonroof, your options are going to be limited. ♪ if you want standard leather-trimmed seats, you're going to have even fewer. ♪ and if you want standard keyless access, then your choice is obvious. the lexus es. it's complete luxury in a class full of compromises. see your lexus dealer. >>> there are about 500 votes separating a sitting d.c. council member and the man who wants his job. vincent orange is currently in the lead to keep his at large seat on the council, but biddle could gain an advantage in absentee ballots. >> reporter: it was a nail biter as the votes came in last week. on our 10:00 news, vince orang

last fall i was in mississippi working side by side with megan darby and planned parenthood and the aclu. we, the feminist majority foundation, were very active on college campuses throughout the state working to defeat initiative 26. that was the personhood initiative that made it to the ballot in mississippi. yes, that was a huge victory. and i don't want to steal megan's thunder, because actually i will boast a little bit about what happened in that particular battle and the incredible effort that planned parenthood and the aclu and other groups, especially planned parenthood, put into that victory coupled with our work on the college campuses. we were 31 points behind two months out before the election. 31 points. we literally, i know planned parenthood put up offices, campaign offices overnight. i mean, threw them up. it was literally astonishing. and the incredible grassroots movement that took place in that state, i think it was something like, oh, thousands and thousands of phone calls that were made. over 412,000 phone calls made within a four-week period, 20,000 doors were knoc

but our loss is the aclu's gain. supervisor olague: i just want to thank you for all of your work on behalf of persons living with disabilities and seniors and your office, which you lead and everyone else there who i have learned a lot from. i just wanted to acknowledge your staff and your leadership. thank you. president chiu: before you speak, why we finish the formalities in adopting this resolution. we have a first. is there a second? let me ask if there is any public comment on this matter. seeing none, public comment is closed. walter, did you want to speak on this item? >> ♪ thanks for all the mayors disability work you do, a suit. we really do appreciate it. ♪ thanks for all you do it. the mayor thinks you, too. ♪ we thank you for all you do, sue. [applause] president chiu: unless there is any more public comment on this item, public comment is closed. >> [roll call] 10 are ayes. president chiu: congratulations, susan. [applause] now it's your turn. >> this is so sweet and part of what makes it so hard to le

>> yeah, i put smily faces and lols. >> the smily faces are mentioned in the aclu lawsuit as proof ofhat they said was an innocent conversation. the school told the girls they'd be welcome back in the next school year as long as they stay off facebook. >>> almost three decades, blanka has been suffering from a debilitating cough. she started coughing up blood in december and doctors found a mass in her lungs. cancer. after two endoscopies, she started coughing violently and something popped out of her mouth. it was a seed. she remembered she swaul --swallowed it 28 years ago. sure enough, it was a seed and not cancer. they actually saw it on her x-ray. >> we had an airplane forced to land in chicago after a sick passenger developed a rash. the passenger had been to africa and they thought it could be monkey-pox. the cdc cleared the patient saying the rash didn't look like monkey pox and was not infectious. >>> it's been almost a year since osama bin laden was killed by navy s.e.a.l.s in afghanistan. they're concerned about al qaeda's affiliate in yemen. al qaeda has made it clear they

they argue that what they do outside of school is private and should not be the school's business the aclu filed a lawsuit yesterday alleging that the school violated the teenagers first amendment rights the school is not return phone calls about the case but in a letter to one of the teen-ager's parents officials said that the death remarks were considered to be harassment and intimidating which violated the provisions of the student handbook the school district has 21 days to respond to that aclu lawsuit the day's top business stories are up next as well as the news that time for your bloomberg on the money report ... housing sales for march are coming in better than expected rising to the higher levels since april 2010 ... there's more buyers confidence ... but more americans are expected to file for first-time jobless benefits ... and there is a sign that the labor market has only had slight improvements while the unemployment rate remains at elevated levels ... the senate has delivered the postal service a lifeline voting to giving the postal service access to billions more in cash to

for decades, the aclu has been at the forefront against all forms of racial profiling. racial profiling is policing based on stereotypes instead of faxed evidence and good police work. racial profiling fuels fear and mistrust between law enforcement and the very communities they are supposed to protect. racial profiling is not only in effective, it is unconstitutional and violates basic norms of human rights, both at home and abroad. my testimony lays out how race, religion, national origin are used as proxies for suspicion in three key areas of national security, of routine law enforcement and immigration. in the context of national security, recently released fbi documents demonstrates how the fbi targets innocent americans based on race, ethnicity, national origin and first protected political activity. some counterproductive fbi practices waste law enforcement resources, damage essential relationships with those communities and encourage racial profiling at the state and local level. in my native new york, the new york police department has targeted muslim new yorke

on behalf of the aclu, i wish to thank each of you for your leadership on this critical issue. i also would like to thank you, chairman durbin in particular to partner with our illinois office to address the issue of profiling. i look forward to working with you in the years ahead. >> thanks, mr. romero. frank gale served for 23 years in the denver county sheriff's department where he had responsibility for the courts and jail. captain gale is currently the commander of the training academy in the community relations unit and the public information officer. he has received numerous awards and declarations from the fraternal order of police and denver sheriff's department. captain gale, it's an honor to have you here today. please proceed. >> thank you. good morning, mr. chairman, and distinguished members of the senate subcommittee on constitution civil rights and human rights. my name is frank gale. i'm a 23-year veteran in the denver police department and currently hold the rank of captain. i am the national second vice president for the fraternal order of police, the largest

because it doesn't look liej any of the major cities i've visited in any 11 years as director of the aclu. with all due respect, you will forgive me for having to point out that your very apt mystic assertion that all is well is not born out by the daddy that we have have. let my give you data that we think very well in new york city, the country's largest police department. there were, from 2002 to 2011, there were more than 4.3 million street stuff. 4.3 million. 88% of those -- that's nearly 3.8 million -- were of independent workers. that means very much eithered arrests or summons. let's break it down place by place. norfolk is not a very good place for people who are african-american or latino. in 2011, a record 285,000 people were stopped by the new york police department. 88% were totally innocent of any crime. 53% were black. 34% were latino. 9% white and remarkable number of guns were found on 0.2% of all stops. now, with all due respect, officer gale, i must demure when you say this is all conduct driven. the fact is that there is a problem and i would assert that the reason why

. >> i met attorney with the aclu. we are an amicus, and we, and others, including the national immigration law center have filed an action even before the department of justice did. there are storytelling things about today's argument. >> you can go there or wait. we're doing this year. okay? >> there are three telling things about the argument. right out of the box, several justices expressed concern about the civil liberty impact of state bill 1070. as a result of those serious civil liberty impact, the state of arizona has narrowed the bill substantially and is saying this is a provision for notification of the federal government, but that is not what state bill 1070 does and i think that is clear from the statute as well as everything that we heard today. it became clear in the course of today's argument that the justices are concerned about the system of mass incarceration that will catch u.s. citizens and immigrants lawfully in the united states. it became clear today that there is no federal system that would re

the aclu put out a report on this issue in december in which we issued some recommendations. ink we are not oppose today the use of drones domestically. i think there are a broad range of valuable ways in which law enforcement can use this technology to meet legitimate law enforcement needs. at the same time, we are concerned that they not become tools of general or pervasive surveillance so that innocent americans have to worry about whether or not they're being subject to this kind of monitoring. um, in addition, it would be nice -- and i think conversations like this are a start of it -- for there to be a real, um, democratic debate about the rules under which drones are adopted which, of course, is different from how surveillance technologies are usually adopted. i think there are a bunch of complicated issues here not just dealing with government surveillance, but also with the private use of drones that are very thorny. i know you're planning on talking about private surveillance, so i won't touch too much of that. i just want to mention one other issue which is the pote

after reviewing 5500 pages of records, the aclu was police agencies large and small often obtain cell phone data without permission because not all wireless carriers demand a warrant or court order before handing over the data. >> if the government wants it, it needs a search warrant f for gets it without a search warrant, it has committed a crime, a crime in the act of getting it. >> reporter: the aclu saying in the report this has become big business for service providers, quote, cell phone companies have manuals for police explaining what data the companies store, how much they charge police to access that data and what officers need to do to get it. >> if your probable cause wasn't there to get a search warrant, you obtain information that you couldn't get through a warrant or you just fail to get a warrant, everything that came afterwards is going to fawn. >> reporter: many agency saying they only use cell phone data to solve crimes and track missing persons and obtaining a warrant can slow down that process. >> if we have to ask a judge to search the cell phone records to find i

one of the people speaking out against this is the legislative counsel for the aclu. joining us. and tell me what you think is the primary problem of cispa. >> thanks for having me. the number one problem with cispa is it allows companies who hold sensitive information to share it with the government. it can be ever from the content of our emails to the website we visit. and the companies don't have any responsibility to pull out our sensitive and private information. and they can send it directly to the military the national security agency and we saw after 9/11 the last time the companies and the nsa were allowed to collect information, we ended up with the wiretapping program. >> and i remember they said we're just going to use it to listen to al-qaeda. what is the worst case of abuse? >> the worst case scenario is the big companies who control the backbone where our communications go over are going to share things directly with the nsa. they are going to use it for other purposes and eventually keep it forever because there is no requirement to destroy any of this

. >> actually, the aclu and over civil rights groups brought lawsuit before the justice department camen. unlike the federal government we have claims and fourth amendment claims, and there is some evidence despite the fact that arizona's law has never gone into effect, we see agencies in arizona who has long had the policy that arizona is now trying to make a matter of statewide mandate. so there are some who have been doing these stops. and u.s. citizen who is are latino. they have been stopped, profile and detained at the side of the road and asked by police officers to prove their right to be there. >> i have no question that that is the impact of this would be, but verillo his argument did not rest on that. chad, you said you were not an lawyer. my hat goes on to you, that means you something that we lawyers have, which is common sense. look forward. what if this statute is struck down or even if it isn't how does that play out politically? this is going to be contentious going into the november race. give us the more on this. >> i think the majority of the public in arizona and na

the pennsylvania aclu at, which many of the state level aclu's, was trying to come to grips with newchnology available on telephones, including things like call waiting, but in particular, caller id. the aclu in pennsylvania took the position -- this was never taken by the national aclu -- they took the provision nevada -- they took the position that caller id was an intensely wrong way of denying people free expression because it is essentially meant that somebody could not get to you. the caller id and was actually a first amendment violation that the state telephone regulators should eliminate because it eliminated the first amendment right you had to reach somebody and communicate speaks to them. 10 trillion telemarketer calls later, this attitude is entirely inconceivable to any person in this room and any person listening. that is our notions of privacy have shifted in remarkable ways, including our notions of privacy from person to person. how do drones' fit into this. on their own in relation to privacy and second as a sort of enablers technology, a leveraging technology in c

stores in town, one of them pinheads are us sells shrimp for 27 cents but their profit goes to fund the aclutriots usa sells shrimp for $4 a shrimp, but donates all its proceeds to a shell ter for flags that have been damaged in fires. (laughter) you need the shrimp, o'reilly. one one do you buy. >> i'm not eating the shrimp, i'm not buying the shrimp, i will give a donation for bill o'reilly.com to the flag people. no shrimp rz all right, all right, would you pay $4 for a shrimp if it were wrapped in a $10 bill netting you a profit of $6? >> i would steal the $4 shrimp, and then donate it to the occupy wall street folks so they know what the 1%ers eat. >> jon: try this one. >> i don't buy it. >> jon: aliens have invaded earth, and have used some kind of shrimpifying ray. turning all our food into shrimp and against all economic principles instead of causing the price to plumb at the time somehow raises the price-- to $4 and you discover there is an exhaust port in their space sheep that you can use to blow it up. the port is the same exact size and shape of a shrimp, would you buy a $4 shri

all of us for legal services children and the aclu is taking this decision of the secretary of the state to court and we hope that it will result in the expansion of voting rights for people that should have them but are imprisoned in county jail. given that civic engagement really means a lot more than just voting or the right to serve on juries, or the right to have elected office, i wanted to include a person from viet center for young women's development of about what the result has been on her drug conviction for her to engage in civil society in terms of the exercise of democracy. i would like to introduce tracy. >> good evening, everyone. how are you doing? a little bit how all it is, it is heart. it is hard trying to get a regular job like at mcdonald's, burger king, at any little commandant. -- at any little company. i kind of went back on track and they were required to do 220 hours of committee service, so i had to go through the center for community development. when i was there, it was an internship. i applied, i thought i was not fit to get the job, you know. i had the misd