Funny, that quote could be said about the "FISA ruled PRISM unconstitutional" mantra that is implied in the title. We have no idea if FISA ruled about PRISM, if they feds changed it to comply with those rulings, or it was something else completely. We ought to know and that in and of it self is enough.
Correct. This is an awfully misleading title. The blogs cite blogs upon blogs, not any actual court filings, which do not reveal any ruling whatsoever about the merits of the constitutional matters. The coverage of this looks like an out of control telephone game.
No, that's not true. There's an actual source document, which I link to in the post. It's the argument by the Obama administration that the secret ruling should be kept secret. The contents of the secret opinion was revealed by two U.S. senators. See the EFF article for details.
There is a link to the motion to keep the court filing secret. The entire point of the EFF piece is that the constitutional merit of the legal argument underpinning PRISM is being kept under total secrecy, so obviously they don't have access to the actual ruling.
