The federal government just granted itself greater power to hack into our computers and devices, and did it all without a single vote in Congress.

According to a digital rights defense group, Electronic Frontier Foundation, a new proposal from the little-known advisory committee on criminal rules for the Judicial Conference of the United States has been approved by the Supreme Court. It will amend federal Rule 41 and give federal law enforcement "new avenues for government hacking."

It's a "legal quirk," as Ars Technica explains:

Consider that the US surveillance state was greatly expanded, and yet not a single member of Congress voted for the Justice Department's proposal last week.

That's because of a quirk in US law that allows so-called "procedural rules" of court to be written by unelected advisory committees under the umbrella of the Administrative Office of the US Courts. From there, they are generally rubber stamped by the Supreme Court. The only way these rules don't become law is if Congress takes action to thwart them.

To that end, Congress has until December 1 to either alter the amendment to Rule 41 or reject it entirely. If they do nothing, the amended rule will become law automatically. If that happens, here is what to expect, according to EFF:

The proposal would grant a judge the ability to issue a warrant to remotely access, search, seize, or copy data when “the district where the media or information is located has been concealed through technological means” or when the media are on protected computers that have been “damaged without authorization and are located in five or more districts.” It would grant this authority to any judge in any district where activities related to the crime may have occurred.

Basically this means any judge could issue one blanket warrant to access many computers, without the need of a separate warrant for each. In addition, the judge is not bound by his own jurisdiction and can spread the dragnet over any district, even to other countries.

This rule also affects people who use online privacy tools to traverse the web undetected. The EFF report adds, "If this rule change is not stopped, anyone who is using any technological means to safeguard their location privacy could find themselves suddenly in the jurisdiction of a prosecutor-friendly or technically-naïve judge, anywhere in the country."

Ars warned of more troubling implications for people not committing cyber crimes: a government dragnet could inadvertently collect an innocent person's IP address and result in their data being searched or copied without a warrant or with their knowledge.

The Justice Department is onboard with the rule because they believe it will help enable them to better identify and apprehend criminals "using sophisticated anonymizing technologies to conceal their identities while they engage in crime over the Internet." They're not concerned if this happens to breach any of your private information.

Democratic senator from Oregon Ron Wyden released a statement against Rule 41's additional powers:

Under the proposed rules, the government would now be able to obtain a single warrant to access and search thousands or millions of computers at once; and the vast majority of the affected computers would belong to the victims, not the perpetrators, of a cybercrime. These are complex issues involving privacy, digital security and our Fourth Amendment rights, which require thoughtful debate and public vetting. Substantive policy changes like these are clearly a job for Congress, the American people and their elected representatives, not an obscure bureaucratic process.

A quote from Instapundit summarizes this government overreach nicely: "Expanded government power without anyone taking responsibility. It’s the American way, in the 21st Century."