Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act of 2007
A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to enable increased federal prosecution of identity theft crimes and to allow for restitution to victims of identity theft.
11/15/2007--Passed Senate amended. Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act of 2007 - Amends the federal criminal code to:
(1) authorize criminal restitution orders in identity theft cases to compensate victims for the time spent to remediate the intended or actual harm more...
Users Tracking [5]
Users who are tracking this bill are also tracking:
Committees
Amendments
This bill has no amendments.
Bill Status
| Introduced | ![]() | Voted on by Senate | ![]() | Voted on by House | ![]() | Considered By President | ![]() | Bill Becomes Law |
| October 16, 2007 | November 15, 2007 |
In the News
December 19, 2007 BSA urges congress to pass cyber crime legislation
He told the committee members that Senate passage of the Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act of 2007 (S. 2168) has created an opportunity for ...
December 10, 2007 Dueling cybercrime bills: House to focus on breach notifications
According to Gopalani, HR 4175 tracks closely with S. 495, the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2007, an earlier version of S. 2168, ...
December 10, 2007 Justice details grants to help victims of ID theft
The Senate passed one such bill, S. 2168, last month. The measure was introduced by Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy. The Vermont Democrat issued ...
Blog Coverage
March 02, 2008 Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act
There is a bill in Congress called the Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act of 2007. It was passed the Senate in November 2007 (S.2168) and referred to the House Committee on t...
Source: Identity theft act
Was this article useful?
Yes or
No
February 17, 2008 Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act
It was passed the Senate in November 2007 (S.2168) and referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary in December. According to the Bankers Online Security blog, some of the bill's features are: ...
Source: Truston Identity Theft Blog
Was this article useful?
Yes or
No
December 11, 2007 Dueling cybercrime bills: House to focus on breach notifications ...
Identity Theft Enforcement and Restitution Act of 2007 (S. 2168), which would permit victims of identity theft to seek compensation and make it easier for federal prosecutors to target individuals deploying botnets, according to Ameer ...
Source: Sector Private
Was this article useful?
Yes or
No








Rating Filter: 5 (What's this?)(Close help)
Comments
(What's this?)(Close help)
I am a victim of Idenity Theft (Bio-Metric) approved by the FDIC. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), confirmed to the U. S. Senate and U.S. Congress that: “Ms. Gibson-Michaels specifically complained about one of her conversations with a co-worker being tape-recorded by that co-worker and relied upon by management.” See Dorris v. Absher, 179 F.3d 420 (6th Cir. 1999)(coworkers in a small office had a reasonable expectation of privacy). The FDIC willfuly violated the wiretap statute. Ms. Gibson-Michaels demands that FDIC reported officials are held accountable.
The wiretap statute prohibits the use of certain electronic, mechanical and other devices to intercept oral communications, §2511(1)(b), See §2511(1)(e). Accordingly, 18 U.S.C. §2511(1)(d) prohibits the “USE” of the contents of any wire, oral or electronic communication by any person, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through by interception in violation of the [Wiretap] Act. See Leach v. Bryam, 68 F.Supp.2d 1072 (D.Minn, 1999). See Rodgers v. Wood, 910 F.2d 444 (7th Cir. 1990).
The D.C. Circuit has outright recognized the “right of a federal job applicant to seek injunctive relief from an agency’s violation of his constitutional rights in general.” See Hubbard v. U.S. E.P.A. Admin., 809 F.2d 1, 11 (D.C.Cir. 1986). See O’Donnell v. Barry, 148 F.3d 1126, 1143-44 (D.C. Cir. 1998), citing Kartseva v. Department of State, 37 F.3d 1524, 1527-29 (D.C.Cir.1994).
FDIC reported officials remain untarnished by their admitted actions of wiretap vioaltions and the approval of an unlicensed security guard to intercept Ms. Gibson-Michaels oral communications without a Court Order because she [quoted a Bible verse inside a closed door office during a conversation at the request of two former employees involved in a Federal theft whom willfully sought Gibson-Michaels for advice as confirmed by U.S. District Court Order dated May 3, 2007.]
Honorable Judge Ricardo Urbina, U.S. District Judge reversed and upheld Free Exercise of Religious Speech on behalf of Gutantanamo Detainees (Non-American Citizens) on February 6, 2006. See Shafiq Rasul v. Donald Rumsfeld, case no. 04-cv-01864. However, the same Judge denied Gibson-Michaels her rights as a United States American Citizen to seek restitution against unlicensed contract Security Guard Defendants. See U.S. District Court of Appeals no. 07-7118 and 06-cv-1938 Washington, D.C., 'FREEDOM FOR THEE BUT NOT FOR ME'
Contact Gibson-Michaels at ygmichaels@yahoo.com
Add A Comment