Thursday, in an interview conducted at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg talked about their views of the First Amendment.
Moderator Marvin Kalb questioned Scalia about whether the NSA wiretapping could be be in violation of the Constitution:
Justice Antonin Scalia said,
“No because it’s not absolute. As Ruth has said there are very few freedoms that are absolute. I mean your person is protected by the Fourth Amendment, but as I pointed out when you board a plane, someone can pass his hands all over your body. That’s a terrible intrusion, but given the danger that it’s guarding against, it’s not an unreasonable intrusion. And it can be the same thing with acquiring this data that is regarded as effects. That’s why I say its foolish to have us make the decision because I don’t know how serious the danger is in this NSA stuff, I really don’t.”
Scalia was also questioned by Journalists on whether she was aware of why the Washington Post & the Guardian won the Pulitzer prize recently. She stated that she didn’t no why and that she doesn’t read the Post. She also said that the question is easily answered by Journalists and not her.
Another addition to this NSA topic is an interview where Edward Snowden asked
“Does Russia intercept, store, analyze in any way the communications of individuals?”
Vladimir Putin stated
“We do not allow ourselves to do this. And, we will never allow this. We do not have the money or the means to do that,” answered Putin. “The most important thing is we have a special service that’s thankfully under strict state control.”
In March of last year, U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, asked a similar question of the director of national intelligence.
“Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?” he asked James R. Clapper.
“No, sir … not wittingly.” He later clarified his remarks.
That answer, compared to Putin’s, is not at all comforting.