Okay, thank you for coming out. Its wonderful to see you here today hello, my name is Christopher Mcknight nichols, im a historian at oregon state university, scholar of intellectual history of the u. S. Role in the world. I specialize in isolationism, internationalism, and globalization. My work is called promise and peril, america at the dawn of a global age, just out in paperback, you can buy a downstairs. I have the distinct pleasure of being the chair and coorganizer of this panel. Its a fascinating panel. Our panel is entitled turning. 1916, u. S. Foreign relations before and after that kept us out of war election. This is not just about u. S. Foreign relations, but also international relations. The spark for this panel is this intending all of the 1960 election in which Woodrow Wilson ran on a he kept us out of war platform, despite military intervention ongoing in the mexico and caribbean. This roundtable brings together superb historians to discuss whether 1916 should be as th
Thank you all for coming out. Its wonderful to see you here today. My name is Christopher Mcknight nichols, im a historian at oregon state university, a scholar of the u. S. International role in the world, i specialize in isolationism, internationalism, and globalization and my work that pertains to the panel today is promise in peril. You can buy it downstairs. I have the distinct pleasure of being the chair and coorganizer of this really exciting panel, i think, and i hope youll agree once were done. Its a fascinating topic with tremendous contemporary relevance as well as his totori significance. Our panel is entitled turning. 1916. This the not just about Foreign Relations but also world relations, international relations. Now the spark for this panel is the centennial of the 1916 election in which Woodrow Wilson ran on a he kept us out of war platform, despite the military interventions ongoing in mexico and in the caribbean. Marking the secentennial of thi election, this round t
Globalization and my work that most pertains to our panel today is a book called promise and peril america at the dawn of a global age. Just out in paperback. You can buy it downstairs. I have the distinct pleasure of being the chair and coorganizer of this really exciting panel i think and i hope youll agree once were done. Its a fascinating topic with tremendous contemporary relevance as well as historygraphical significance. U. S. Foreign relations before and after that kept us out of war election. This is really not just about u. S. Foreign relations but also world relations, international relations. Now, the spark for this panel is the centennial of the 1916 election in which Woodrow Wilson ran on a he kept us out of war platform despite the military interventions ongoing in mexico and the caribbean. Marking the centennial of this election this round table brings together superb historians with a wide array of focuses to address whether or not 1916 should be seen as the end of an
Advanced and as electronic data and storage have augmented traditional means of communicating and storing information, governmental access to data is more important. Ecpa is critical to tracking down criminals in investigations into murder, kidnapping, organized crime, child exploitati exploitation, Identity Theft, terrorism, and more, but criminal investigations are only a subset of the circumstances in which ecpa applies. The statute applies when the government acts as a civil litigant. We agree that notwithstanding several updates to ecpa the statute draws some lines that do not account for the development of technology and the ways in which we use electronic and stored communications today. For example, theres no principled basis to treat email less than 180 days old different from email more than 180 days old. Theres no lesser protection to emails that have been opened to emails that remain unopened. How to account for changes the technology while maintaining privacy protections a
Things like that potentially unininvestigatable if the target has done a good enough job of hiding his other traces. If we believe that be the case, we wouldnt take the position we have. Our belief is the civil agencies with the tools they have can veth. It is our belief that the type you have to be arguing in order for that to be the case, you have to argue theres no case in which access to information by direct request to the Service Provider contributed in a material way to an investigation . I think its difficult to be categorical in a hypothetical situation. So i would not want to say that. But i will say i think we think on balance, balancing the law the needs of Law Enforcement with the privacy here we believe that the best the best outcome to this is that the civil agencies work with the tools they have rather than extending this new power to them. But you agree and accept that a contested Court Proceeding in open court with the target of the investigation present is a more rig