I downloaded the pdf and started reading.  Here's my take so far. This is related to complaints that Obama violated privacy rights of a party in Northern CA (I think) by his authorized surveillance.    They were using telephony Call Data Records (CDR) to support the spying.  Sound familiar? Here's the footnote 3: As pertinent to the preservation issue, the Government has argued that the Jewel and Shubert complaints at most purport to raise claims regarding the presidentially authorized bulk telephony metadata program and not the subsequent FISC-authorized Section 215 Program. See Jewel v. NSA, Gov't Defs.' Brief Regarding Compliance with Preservation Orders, ECF No. 229, at 13-26. The plaintiffs, however, maintain that they contest the legality of both presidentially authorized and FISA-authorized programs (and therefore that the Government's destruction, per FISC orders, of aged-off bulk telephony rnetadata collected under Section 215 constituted spoliation). See id., Jewel Pls.' Brief Re: the Gov't's Non-Compliance with the Court' Evidence Preservation Orders, ECF No. 233, at 10-19; Shubert v. Obama, Pls.' Brief Concerning the Gov't's Violation of the Court's Preservation Orders, ECF No. 124. The district court has not decided the issue. Now, I'm not a Lawfag, so not totally sure about all the implications.  But, generally, I'm not in favor of telephony companies providing records to agencies for the purposes of spying on US.  I understand how illicitly obtained records need to be kept from destruction when there is a court proceeding requirement. I see parallels: Carter Page Comey & His Special Government Employee pal, Daniel Richman & His Special project. Michael Flynn Devin Nunes Adam Schiff's Leaking CDRs to Media. Perhaps I'm wrong.  But, I see parallels. Edit: More parallels that Hakeem Jeffries reminded of:  Dems claims about President Trump putting call record in a secure server. Crowdstrike...