Mission Creep and Wiretap Act \u27Super Warrants\u27: A Cautionary Tale

Congress enacted the Wiretap Act in 1968 in an effort to combat organized crime while safeguarding the privacy of innocent Americans. However, the Act instead served to legitimize wiretapping, and its privacy protections have eroded over time. As a result, there has been a significant increase in wiretapping in the decades since the Act’s passage. As technology evolves, the Wiretap Act does less to protect Americans’ private communications from government interception. Nevertheless, policy makers see the Wiretap Act, with its “super-warrant” procedures, as the gold standard for statutory privacy protection. To the contrary, when considering how to regulate new and powerful surveillance technologies, advocates must not reflexively rely on the language of the Wiretap Act as a model for adequate privacy safeguards. They must consider whether, given the Act’s apparent flaws, it is possible to meaningfully balance the invasiveness of a new technique with the preservation of individual privacy. If so, drafters should focus on crafting statutory language that better implements the intended safeguards of the Act than the Act itself has. This Article describes the deterioration of the Wiretap Act’s protections and should serve as a cautionary tale to advocates as they propose new legislation in the face of modern surveillance tools

Rifaximin Is Effective for the Treatment of Clostridium difficile—Associated Diarrhea: Results of an Open-Label Pilot Study

Objectives. This open-label trial assessed the efficacy and safety of rifaximin as first-line therapy in hospitalized patients with Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD). Methods. We enrolled thirteen patients who had a confirmed diagnosis of CDAD characterized by ≥3 unformed stools/day and positive C. difficile toxin assay. Those patients received rifaximin 400 mg three times daily for 10 days. Resolution of symptoms, repeat assay 10 days after treatment, and followup for recurrence were assessed. Results. Eight patients completed the study, and all reported symptom resolution during treatment. Mean time to last unformed stool was 132 h ± 42.5 h. Seven patients had no relapse by week 2 and in longer followup (median 162 days). One patient had recurrent CDAD during a repeat hospitalization. Conclusions. Rifaximin was effective and safe as first-line treatment for CDAD and did not result in recurrence in most patients

Mission Creep and Wiretap Act \u27Super Warrants\u27: A Cautionary Tale

Congress enacted the Wiretap Act in 1968 in an effort to combat organized crime while safeguarding the privacy of innocent Americans. However, the Act instead served to legitimize wiretapping, and its privacy protections have eroded over time. As a result, there has been a significant increase in wiretapping in the decades since the Act’s passage. As technology evolves, the Wiretap Act does less to protect Americans’ private communications from government interception. Nevertheless, policy makers see the Wiretap Act, with its “super-warrant” procedures, as the gold standard for statutory privacy protection. To the contrary, when considering how to regulate new and powerful surveillance technologies, advocates must not reflexively rely on the language of the Wiretap Act as a model for adequate privacy safeguards. They must consider whether, given the Act’s apparent flaws, it is possible to meaningfully balance the invasiveness of a new technique with the preservation of individual privacy. If so, drafters should focus on crafting statutory language that better implements the intended safeguards of the Act than the Act itself has. This Article describes the deterioration of the Wiretap Act’s protections and should serve as a cautionary tale to advocates as they propose new legislation in the face of modern surveillance tools