[rjf72]

You literally have NSA whistle-blowers stating, under oath, that these programs are not legal and the NSA is knowingly and purposefully violating the US constitution. [1] That testimony was part of Jewel v NSA [2] which emphasizes what happens when you take intelligence agencies to court. That case was filed more than a decade ago.

The government has already managed to get numerous key parts dismissed under state secrets privilege. [3] The government was also directed to preserve key data related to what remained of the case. In 2018 they informed the court they'd accidentally deleted it. Oops. [4] Oh yeah, in the same statement they also acknowledged they lied under oath when previously stating that they had preserved all relevant data on magnetic tapes and stored them with counsel. Oops again! Penalties.. consequences? You can guess.

And yes, you can also sue the government in China. Just don't expect to win.

[1] - https://publicintelligence.net/binney-nsa-declaration/

[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewel_v._NSA

[3] - https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/02/jewel-v-nsa-making-sen...

[4] - https://www.lawfareblog.com/summary-jewel-v-nsa-and-accident...

[computerex]

The PRISM program was authorized by the congress and run under the supervision of the judiciary.

[rhizome]

PRISM is selector-based (email, ph#), where is there anything to say that Chinese surveillance is more than that? I might just be ignorant of well-known facts, but there's nothing obvious to me so far with which to do a comparative analysis.