Warrant Canaries Beyond the First Amendment: A Comment

Jonathon Penney; Jon Penney

Warrant Canaries Beyond the First Amendment: A Comment

Jonathon Penney, Jon Penney

Dalhousie University Schulich School of Law

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Abstract

Warrant canaries have emerged as an intriguing tool for Internet companies to provide some measure of transparency for users while also complying with national security laws. Though there is at least a reasonable argument for the legality of warrant canaries in the U.S. based primarily on First Amendment "compelled speech" doctrine, the same cannot be said for the use of warrant canaries in other "Five Eyes” intelligence agency countries — United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia — where the legality of warrant canaries has yet to be examined in either cases or scholarship. This comment, which provides an overview of their potential legality in these jurisdiction, aims to help fill that void.

Original language	Canadian English
Title of host publication	Warrant Canaries Beyond the First Amendment: A Comment
Publication status	Published - Jan. 1 2014

Keywords

First Amendment
Warrant Canary
Transparency
Five Eyes
National Security
Compelled Speech
Constitution
United Kingdom
United States
Canada
New Zealand
Australia

Disciplines

Comparative and Foreign Law
Constitutional Law
Internet Law
Law
National Security Law
Privacy Law
Science and Technology Law

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

Warrant Canaries Beyond the First Amendment A CommentFinal published version, 212 KBLicence: Unspecified

Cite this

@inbook{6f806487f8c647ef92c97140c5dc9069,

title = "Warrant Canaries Beyond the First Amendment: A Comment",

abstract = " Warrant canaries have emerged as an intriguing tool for Internet companies to provide some measure of transparency for users while also complying with national security laws. Though there is at least a reasonable argument for the legality of warrant canaries in the U.S. based primarily on First Amendment {"}compelled speech{"} doctrine, the same cannot be said for the use of warrant canaries in other {"}Five Eyes” intelligence agency countries — United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia — where the legality of warrant canaries has yet to be examined in either cases or scholarship. This comment, which provides an overview of their potential legality in these jurisdiction, aims to help fill that void.",

keywords = "First Amendment, Warrant Canary, Transparency, Five Eyes, National Security, Compelled Speech, Constitution, United Kingdom, United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia",

author = "Jonathon Penney and Jon Penney",

note = "Jonathon Penney, {"}Warrant Canaries Beyond the First Amendment: A Comment{"} in Urs Gasser, Jonathan Zittrain, Robert Faris & Rebekah H. Jones, eds, Internet Monitor 2014: Reflections on the Digital World: Platforms, Policy, Privacy, and Public Discourse (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University, 2014) 49.",

year = "2014",

month = jan,

day = "1",

language = "Canadian English",

booktitle = "Warrant Canaries Beyond the First Amendment: A Comment",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Warrant Canaries Beyond the First Amendment: A Comment

AU - Penney, Jonathon

AU - Penney, Jon

N1 - Jonathon Penney, "Warrant Canaries Beyond the First Amendment: A Comment" in Urs Gasser, Jonathan Zittrain, Robert Faris & Rebekah H. Jones, eds, Internet Monitor 2014: Reflections on the Digital World: Platforms, Policy, Privacy, and Public Discourse (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University, 2014) 49.

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Warrant canaries have emerged as an intriguing tool for Internet companies to provide some measure of transparency for users while also complying with national security laws. Though there is at least a reasonable argument for the legality of warrant canaries in the U.S. based primarily on First Amendment "compelled speech" doctrine, the same cannot be said for the use of warrant canaries in other "Five Eyes” intelligence agency countries — United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia — where the legality of warrant canaries has yet to be examined in either cases or scholarship. This comment, which provides an overview of their potential legality in these jurisdiction, aims to help fill that void.

AB - Warrant canaries have emerged as an intriguing tool for Internet companies to provide some measure of transparency for users while also complying with national security laws. Though there is at least a reasonable argument for the legality of warrant canaries in the U.S. based primarily on First Amendment "compelled speech" doctrine, the same cannot be said for the use of warrant canaries in other "Five Eyes” intelligence agency countries — United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia — where the legality of warrant canaries has yet to be examined in either cases or scholarship. This comment, which provides an overview of their potential legality in these jurisdiction, aims to help fill that void.

KW - First Amendment

KW - Warrant Canary

KW - Transparency

KW - Five Eyes

KW - National Security

KW - Compelled Speech

KW - Constitution

KW - United Kingdom

KW - United States

KW - Canada

KW - New Zealand

KW - Australia

UR - https://digitalcommons.schulichlaw.dal.ca/scholarly_works/1813

M3 - Chapter

BT - Warrant Canaries Beyond the First Amendment: A Comment

ER -

Warrant Canaries Beyond the First Amendment: A Comment

Abstract

Keywords

Disciplines

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this