In a blog post from 2015, titled: Don't Strike Down the Safe Harbor Based on Inaccurate Views About U.S. Intelligence Law(https://iapp.org/news/a/dont-strike-down-the-safe-harbor-based-on-inaccurate-views-on-u-s-intelligence-law/) , Law Professor Peter Swire explains that the CJEU relied on a faulty description of U.S. laws and practices when reaching its conclusions in the Schrems case. What are the key components of Professor Swire's arguments? Are they convincing?