The ACLU has filed suit against the Obama administration over the NSA phone data collection program
made public last week, charging the
program "violates Americans' constitutional rights of free speech, association, and privacy." They've asked a judge to stop the program and that all the records collected under it be purged.
The program, they argue, has a direct impact on the ACLU, and “gives the government a comprehensive record of our associations and public movements, revealing a wealth of detail about our familial, political, professional, religious and intimate associations [and] is likely to have a chilling effect on whistle-blowers and others who would otherwise contact.”
That part of the argument is key. The ACLU has been involved in previous lawsuits over this program, since it began under the Bush administration and was made public by the New York Times in 2005. Those suits were successfully fended off by both Bush and Obama administrations. The government has regularly gotten these suites dismissed by arguing that litigation over classified programs or because the plaintiffs couldn't prove they were personally affected and thus didn't have standing to sue.
Now both of those defenses are no longer available to the administration. The program was declassifed in response to this leak. State secrets is no longer a valid argument. Likewise, the ACLU is a customer of Verizon Business Network Services, the Verizon subsidiary that received the leaked secret court order for all of its domestic calling records. Including those of the ACLU. Thus, this case has the potential to reach the Supreme Court.
The ACLU argues that the program violates their First Amendment rights to speech and association because the "nature of the ACLU's work—in areas like access to reproductive services, racial discrimination, the rights of immigrants, national security, and more—means that many of the people who call the ACLU wish to keep their contact with the organization confidential." They also argue that the program as conducted under Section 215 of the Patriot Act constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment.
Finally, they argue that "the executive branch's use of Section 215 violates the plain language of the statute itself." The statute requires that data seized under its authority be "relevant" to an authorized investigation, and doesn't stretch to allow the collection of every customer's data.