By Aaron Miller
The Federal Supreme Court has ruled against the U.S government in a victorious case for Microsoft.
A magistrate Court contacted Microsoft and had requested for information about a suspected drug trafficker, demanding email contents on email servers where ever they in the world they are. The government had argued that Microsoft had to deliver records, physical objects and other materials, no matter where they are located, provided they were subject to the company’s custody and control records”
However, the Supreme Court ruled that “warrants don’t apply to electronic data such as emails on servers outside the country”
According to the courts,”the presumption against extraerrestial application of United States Statutes, is strong and binding”.
BLAME
The U.S cannot be blamed for.seeking at all costs data required to nail a suspected drug trafficker. The object was unarguably noble, but the letter of the law inevitably decides the legal limitations. That’s how we learn about rights and limitations, in order to seek alternative means of achieving an outcome.
Three Federal Court judges ruled that congress did not intend for the warrant provision of the law to apply outside the U.S.
QUESTIONS
The conflicting judgements raises questions in relation to the competence of the legal system when a magistrates court is ruled to have interpreted the law wrongly. One would expect a court to get it right, especially in important cases.
The government and the magistrates got it wrong. It took the Federal Supreme Court to put them both right. It was a big victory for Microsoft.
