The headline and article both accurately report that 9 years worth of meta data of american citizens is to be handed over to Chevron.
You don't appear to be disputing this so what are you struggling to "reconcile" and what is so "egregious"?
You don't appear to be disputing this so what are you struggling to "reconcile" and what is so "egregious"?
Deliberately is a strong claim. Do you have some internal Mother Jones memo? Since you love to give the status quo the benefit of textual evidence, perhaps you could do the same for this article, and reiterate what you consider to be factually incorrect?
You also dismissed this article because document discovery is a normal procedure. The article discusses how the discovery burden is different for citizens and non-citizens, and how the wrong burden was applied as relates to the first amendment. Do you think it is not important for courts to correctly protect your rights as a citizen through the discovery process? Why would you so pithly dismiss the article otherwise?