ILNews

ACLU of Indiana to host discussion of government surveillance

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A panel of experts next week will take a closer look at the devices that are taking a closer look at us.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana will hold a panel discussion examining privacy and technology. Free and open to the public, the hour-long event will examine the potential for new surveillance of American life from things like drones, federal government and GPS location tracking.

Panelists include Jane Henegar, ACLU of Indiana executive director; Rep. Sue Errington, D-Muncie; and Rich Hanson of the Academy of Model Aeronautics. Phil Bremen, associate professor at Ball State University, will moderate the discussion.

The discussion, “Where Do We Draw the Line on Government Surveillance,” will be held from noon to 12:50 p.m. June 4 in Digital A&B Room of the Innovation Connector, 1208 W. White River Blvd, Muncie.

For more information, visit www.aclu-in.org.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • false opposition
    While I think they sometimes do good, for the most part I think the ACLU is a sop for big government. Now consider all these violations of privacy, warrantless searches done by the NSA: each and every one a violation of criminal law-- thoroughly documented-- and not a single one charged as a crime. A level of intrusion that makes King George look like a silly joke by comparison. Add to that a president that says he not only can assassinate foreigners with killer robot airplanes, but that he can kill American citizens abroad too . And has admittedly done so. (Anwar Al Aliki) With no due process at all.... Let's be frank. The federal executive branch has become LAWLESS. Add to that the anti-democratic judiciary, that lets the executive do whatever it wants, even as it strikes down legit democratic laws because powerful lobbies don't like them-- and a gutless, feckless Congress, afraid of their own shadow -- and you have a system that has become a mockery of itself. "illegitimate" is a word that comes to mind. But the ACLU-- they're good at "not overstating their case." And after all, their number one issue appears to be suppressing Christianity so why bother going hard and fast at Big Brother? Or was it gay rights? Seems like it comes down to what Lenin said "the best way to control the opposition is by leading it ourselves."
  • Julie Is Right
    After reading Julie Kuespert's comment I was amazed at the similarities. They do this to people ALL THE TIME, with little or no oversight. It's essentially gang stalking, orchestrated by police.
  • Coworkers allowed to invade privacy
    recently forced to take fmla leave,was harrassed for months,nothing done.made comment management was part of it if they refuse to do anything about it,they allowed coworkers access to work,home computers and cell and shared info with anyone and everyone thats what happens when you have access to others info and allow the wrong people access or allow them to monotor others.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

    2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

    3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

    4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

    5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

    ADVERTISEMENT