(February 12, 2014) - Senator Rand Paul and FreedomWorks, Inc. filed a class action suit against President Obama and heads of the FBI, CIA and National Intelligence agency in the US District Court for the District of Coumbia (sic) this morning. The suit alleges mass data collection violates the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution which states:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (Source – Wikipedia quoting the Official Bill of Rights in the National Archives)

The Plaintiffs claim that the government under the auspices of the Patriot Act conducts mass, suspicionless, non-particularized collection of domestic and international phone calls made and received by them and those they represent. The complaint alleges that the program, the Mass Associational Tracking Program, MATP in short, violates their subjective expectation of privacy which society views as reasonable.

The suit alleges that 56% of the public surveyed expressed doubts that the searches are reasonable, that they have the public on their side. The survey is cited in an AP story entitled “9/11 Anniversary: Poll finds public doubts growing on federal surveillance, privacy” published in the Houston Chronicle. Whether a small majority of the public expressing doubt is enough to establish society’s views is not established yet. That is an element of the claim that will need further exploration.

Senator Paul alleges that his calls on both AT & T and Verizon, landlines and cellphones have been included in the metadata collected. Paul has been a vocal opponent to government cyber surveillance.

FreedomWorks, Inc., a 501(c)(4) corporation claims 6,000,000 members and 65,000 financially supporting members. The corporation brings the suit on behalf of those members – thus the class action.

The complaint traces the law back to 1978 when FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was passed by Congress. That law was in reaction to abuses and illegalities perpetrated by the US government dating back to the era of J. Edgar Hoover and Nixonian political spying. While FISA wasn’t transparent – law enforcement went to a secret court to obtain a warrant- it was some curb on the power of the state.

After the 9/11 attack, the Patriot Act, in addition to setting up Homeland Security and an alphabet soup of federal agencies, empowered the FBI to go after tangible things. In 2006, Congress changed the standard to force the FBI to at least file a statement of facts with the FISA court.

Since May 2006, during the Bush Administration, mass collection of data began in earnest. The complaint alleges that no one is exempt to collection of metadata.

While the data is nonspecific and Plaintiffs do not appear to say that their conversations are being recorded in the metadata, nor does the metadata identify individuals or organizations, they are concerned that their identities can be discovered by checking against public records, revealing “a person’s name, address, driver’s license, credit history, social security number, and other information.” (Paul et al vs. Obama et al, Class Action Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Page 9, Paragraph 22).

The Plaintiffs are asking the Court for the following:

1. For a finding that the Mass Associational Tracking Program violates the 4th Amendment;
2. For certification of Plaintiffs as a class – a finding with its own rules and requirements that must be made before the suit can continue as a “class action.”
3. For a permanent ban on the metadata collection by the Defendants
4. For an order to Defendants to purge all of the records in their possession;
5. For an order allowing Plaintiffs’ attorneys security clearance to conduct discovery into the files of the intelligence agencies;
6. For court costs and attorney fees which are allowed to successful plaintiffs under federal law.

The next move, not counting appearances on various news networks by the parties to plead their cases in the court of public opinion, is for the Defendants to file an answer to the suit. Expect a full and complete denial of the claims. After that, it will be up to the court to determine whether the Plaintiffs are a class and where they go from here.