1

Landmark US Court Decision Rules that Privacy Under the Fourth Amendment Applies to Smart Meters


The Seventh US Circuit Court handed down a landmark opinion that the Fourth Amendment protects energy-consumption data collected by smart meters, because that data reveals intimate details about personal activities in the home that would be unavailable to the government without a physical search. The court held that residents have a reasonable expectation of privacy in this data and that the government’s access of it constitutes a “search.” More than 40% of American households have a smart meter and the number will likely reach 80% by 2020. Law enforcement agencies are already trying to obtain the data from energy companies without warrants. -GEG

The Seventh Circuit just handed down a landmark opinion, ruling 3-0 that the Fourth Amendment protects energy-consumption data collected by smart meters. Smart meters collect energy usage data at high frequencies—typically every 5, 15, or 30 minutes—and therefore know exactly how much electricity is being used, and when, in any given household. The court recognized that data from these devices reveals intimate details about what’s going on inside the home that would otherwise be unavailable to the government without a physical search. The court held that residents have a reasonable expectation of privacy in this data and that the government’s access of it constitutes a “search.”

This case, Naperville Smart Meter Awareness v. City of Naperville, is the first case addressing whether the Fourth Amendment protects smart meter data. Courts have in the past held that the Fourth Amendment does not protect monthly energy usage readings from traditional, analog energy meters, the predecessors to smart meters. The lower court in this case applied that precedent to conclude that smart meter data, too, was unprotected as a matter of law. On appeal, EFF and Privacy International filed an amicus brief urging the Seventh Circuit to reconsider this dangerous ruling. And in its decision, released last week, the Seventh Circuit wisely recognized that smart meters and analog meters are different:

“Using traditional energy meters, utilities typically collect monthly energy consumption in a single lump figure once per month. By contrast, smart meters record consumption much more frequently, often collecting thousands of readings every month. Due to this frequency, smart meters show both the amount of electricity being used inside a home and when that energy is used.”

The Seventh Circuit recognized that this energy usage data “reveals information about the happenings inside a home.” Individual appliances, the court explained, have distinct energy-consumption patterns or “load signatures.” These load signatures allow you to tell not only when people are home, but what they are doing. The court held that the “ever-accelerating pace of technological development carries serious privacy implications” and that smart meters “are no exception.”

This is critical precedent. Last year, roughly 65 million smart meters had been installed in the United States in recent years, with 88% of them—over 57 million—in homes of American consumers; more than 40% of American households had a smart meter. Experts predict that number will reach about 80% by 2020. And law enforcement agencies are already trying to get access to data from energy companies without a warrant.

In this case, a group of citizens called Naperville Smart Meter Awareness challenged Naperville’s policy of requiring every home to have a smart meter, objecting on Fourth Amendment and other grounds. The district court held that smart meter data—despite being collected directly a city utility, not any non-governmental third party—was subject to the so-called “third party doctrine.” In other words, the lower court reasoned that simply because the utility company held the data, it was automatically devoid of constitutional protection.

Read full article here…




New Strategy to Stop Smart Meters and Hold Politicians Accountable, with 3 Successful Examples

Josh Del Sol and Cal Washington have launched an international movement to put an end to smart meters. Cal says he has discovered a way to remove legal immunity from government and corporate leaders, thereby making them personally liable for health and property damages caused by smart meters.  He says that the threat of law suits filed by hundreds of consumers has caused scores of government and corporate officials to resign from their positions. If this process can be escalated, the whole smart meter program could be scuttled.  [We do not necessarily agree with the concept implied in this video that corporations are bad because they are corporations. Our view is that corporations are no different in concept than partnerships, associations, governments, or any other legal fiction. What makes thm good or bad is the character of the people who run them – and what makes them all a magnet for evil people is that they provide their leaders with legal immunity for their actions. Take that away, and corporations and governments alike will become puppy dogs compared to the wolves they now are. Tat is the reason we like this project: It is developing a tactic that just might strip away this immunity – at least in the case of smart meters. If it works there, perhaps it will work in other areas as well.] -GEG

 

Website link:  https://inpowermovement.com

Summary by JW Williams

Smart Meters are bad because they violate the 4th Amendment that protects privacy, as Smart Meters spy on people in their homes, they have caused fires and explosions, they can cause harm to people’s health, electricity bills have increased to pay for the Smart Meters and they can be hacked.
This episode of of InPower shows you how to prevent or reverse the installation of a Smart Meter on your home by holding individuals in government and corporations accountable.
Cal Washington, an activist from Canada, is calling upon the public to change the top-down system, controlled by the elites at the top of the pyramid, by holding the parties who carry out the elites’ policies accountable, and making their liability outweigh their profits.  For example, if a company stands to profit by $10 million, but has a potential liability of $300 million they will refuse the job.  Without someone to implement the elites’ schemes, the schemes fail.  If the liability outweighs the profit, the companies will abandon the scheme.
Cal explains that most of the world operates using Commerce, which the Babylonian system of money.  Everything is business, and the objective is profit.  Business is conducted through contracts.  Cal says that everyone can use his method, even if you already have a Smart Meter on your home, because the contract is invalid if there was no full disclosure of the harm that can be cause by Smart Meters.  The homeowner can issue a “counter-offer” to the contract, which allows the homeowner to to reject the meter by telling the energy company that if they install it, they will be charged by the day, week or month for having their equipment on the property.
Smart Meters changed the contract that you already agreed to with your electricity company through “tacit agreement”, which means if you don’t say ‘no’, then you have said ‘yes’.  However, contracts have to be negotiated to get to a meeting of the minds and agreement.
The Constitution has been replaced by a new contract that assumes you give up your rights in order to receive benefits from the corporation.  The corporation requires you to obey the rules, which is used as leverage to slip their agendas into place.
Most countries are really corporations, and are simply businesses used to make money.  US Code 3002 states that the “United States” means a Federal corporation.  The US Security and Exchange Commission lists Canada as a company located in Washington, DC.
Jurisdiction
Cal uses an illustration to show different levels of jurisdiction that are nested inside of higher levels of jurisdiction.  Here is a general order of levels of jurisdiction: Companies are subject to City Municipal Governments, which are subject to State Governments, Which are subject to the United States Corporation (this is the level where courts operate), which is subject to Constitutional United States of America, which is subject to the Law of Merchant that governs commerce, which is subject to Common Law, which is subject to Spiritual Jurisdiction.
Most people and systems are operating under the corporation of the United States, including the courts, so they ignore the Constitution.  Cal teaches how to invoke the higher common law, which supersedes the corporate courts.
If people are represented by a lawyer or attorney, they have waived their rights in order to be represented by someone else.  A judge will assume you do not have your rights because you have waived them.  Because the courts are a business, a judge can be viewed as a banker.
Cal’s document shows how immunity can be stripped away from government workers, and they can be held personally responsible, if they violate the Constitution- here’s what it says:
“Whereas it is a fundamental principle of law that nobody is above the law including, but not limited to all government actors.  The government immunity law only applies to government actors when they are performing their actions of their office when defined by their office in good faith and that the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT has made a ruling regarding public officials being held liable for actions done or failure to perform required actions, in the case of MILLBROOK v.  UNITED STATES ( ) 477 Fed. px. 4.”
Essentially, if a government worker acts outside of ‘good faith’, they may be held accountable, and forfeit their immunity.
The Oath of Office to the Constitution is the key because officials swear their oath to the Constitution, not a corporation, so they can be held accountable.
Cal suggests writing to the official who is in violation, and accepting their Oath of Office in writing.  They are then obligated to honor your Constitutional rights because you now have a contract between the two of you.  At this point, they may be held personally liable because they stepped outside of their role and their Oath.  You can then begin the process of giving them a Notice of Liability.
Cal claims that his method has led to the immediate departure and declarations that politicians will not run for re-elections after he has confronted them.  Cal claims that he implicated federal politicians by informing them that there is a crime in progress and that they were required, by their office, to stop it.  When they failed to do so, they defaulted, and then they have stepped down on numerous occasions.
Smart Meters were implemented not just by one company in one city, but it went nationwide across the world, at the same time, indicating an agenda from a very high level.
There are now more than 70 million Smart Meters deployed across he US, and the government has admitted that they use them for spying on individuals.  Energy companies use data as an asset and are partnered with government agencies.
Miles Keogh, a high-ranking commissioner at the National Association of of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, stated that the data gathered by Smart meters will be worth a lot more than the actual electricity.  Data collection is a $2.2 trillion market.
Cal says Smart Meters are treasonous, as they offer aid to the enemy, by spying on people in their homes, which violates the 4th Amendment.
One of Cal’s biggest successes came after his request for a signed copy of British Columbia’s Clean Energy Act, who signed it and who is indemnifying it.  No one replied, so they went into default.  The head of Corix Utilities in BC, Canada, the installer of the meters, resigned.  The action was also sent to the chair of the BC Utilities Commission and 2015, he resigned, too.
When Cal ran his experiment, working with citizens in Seattle, the result was that three city council members announced they would not seek re-election and one resigned immediately.  The CEO of Seattle City and Light announced his resignation.
In Detroit, DTE Utility cut off power to some people who objected to Smart Meters.  Cal helped some local citizens and 21 more individuals put the energy company into default of the Notice of Liability, which resulted in the Michigan Attorney General calling for a free opt-out of Smart Meters.  A city attorney in Warren, Michigan resigned and sent a letter to one of the claimants revealing that the DTE Utility gave elected officeholders $20 million in campaign contributions.
Elements of a Contract:
1.  Offer
2.  Meeting of the minds through negotiation.  Requires full disclosure.
3.  Unconditional acceptance.
4.  Money exchange ratifies the contract.
Cal says that when a power company notifies you that they are installing Smart Meters, they are actually putting out an offer.  Because they put the offer out, they can’t back out and they are subject to individuals’ negotiations for the Smart Meter.  The company has exposed themselves to a contract, hoping peoplew will not understand it.  Individuals can do a conditional acceptance of the meter under terms with a specific fee schedule.  If the power company cannot prove that Smart Meters do not cause harm, then it costs them money.  Notice of liability gives individuals the opportunity to file a lien, call a grand jury, and go after them for treason.  Bill collectors can be used once there is a verified debt.
Steps
1.  Notice of Liability
2.  Notice of Fault.  Give them a second chance, if no answer.

3.  Default- you can start billing when the install Smart Meter.




Your Utility Company Is Spying On You And Selling Information On Your Activities To Corporations, Governments, And … Who Else?

Jerry Day analyzes a sales video for a software program that enables utility companies to collect data on the minute-by-minute activities of their customers.  It creates personal profiles on energy users to be sold to anyone willing to pay for it, which means anyone who can benefit from it. None of this is for the benefit of those being spied upon. The device that makes this possible is the Smart Meter. –GEG