matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 23/09/2026Its streak of no former SACs going to jail is certainly longer than some other field office’s. 120
matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 20/09/2026I see the bigger fix is to address is creating a statutory standard to deal with collection, analysis, retention and disposition of digital evidence by the government. The courts are ill-equipped to address this vacuum. See Comey/Richman. In theory, a preservation letters could be included. 000
matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 20/09/2026I have always been intrigued with this article and the notion of challenging these preservation orders with Professor Kerr's draft motion. But I think the courts are loathe to address the property elements of digital property (binary bundle of sticks) with wide impact in such a narrow application. 101
matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 23/08/2026By a plain text reading of 2232(a), I think that person has violated the statute - especially if he has any evidence of a crime on the device. Obviously, that would lead to the ridiculous and unsustainable result that all citizens are subject to exhaustive digital searches at the border. 000
matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 23/08/2026The government's argument here is dangerous. Theoretically, a person wipes their phone PRIOR to leaving the country so their entire digital life is not on it when returning through customs. The only thing left are the text messages and pictures from the trip. Has that person violated 2232(a)? 100
matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 23/08/2026I am quite sure his attorneys are questioning their continued representation. The charge identifies that he destroyed property. The government traditionally views digital devices as the property and the contained data as merely data. Arguably, he didn't destroy the property. 100
matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 17/06/2026You are 100% right. My arguments with FISA and 702 particularly are mainly post-collection and totally inside baseball. I have no issues with need to collect and the processes used to approve collections. 000
matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 17/06/2026I would argue the difference is the notice provisions for the incidentally collected built into Title III. Having said that, I am fully aware the nature of FISA and FISA 702 make those provisions absolutely not viable. 100
matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 15/05/2026Oh shit, Clarence Carter. www.nytimes.com/2026/05/14/a...nytimes.comClarence Carter, Singer of Lust-Filled Soul Hits, Dies at 90 020
Reposted by @matthewrowold.bsky.socialMichael Feinberg @michael-feinberg.bsky.social · 22/02/2026One of the first things we were taught at Quantico was that there is never a moment in which you are not representing the Bureau; but, then again, we earned our place there, and weren’t granted its directorship as a sinecure for partisan malfeasance and a willingness to disregard the constitution. 5540491048
matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 19/10/2025Point well taken, but catfish is well known to be on the seafood aisle. As of ten years or so ago, there was not a crik/pond aisle at the local grocery store. 😂 280
matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 19/10/2025I lived in Oklahoma City for a long time and am deeply offended by your seafood joke. OKC has seafood! They have oodles of catfish noodled out on Oklahoma creeks, but seafood nonetheless! 1170
matthewrowold.bsky.social @matthewrowold.bsky.social · 11/10/2025It really tied the room together. 1110
