Tag: fisa

Grassley, Durbin: DOJ blocking oversight of foreign intelligence courts

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) are urging the Department of Justice (DOJ) to amend its procedures for congressional attendance at Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (FISCR) proceedings ahead of the expiration of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) next April.

The current procedures, first established by the Biden administration in November 2024, and continued under the current administration, hinder congressional oversight and conflict with Section 5(d) of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA).

“The FISC Procedures, as drafted, comport with neither the plain language nor the spirit of RISAA, and raise numerous separation of powers concerns. As the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate’s primary committee of jurisdiction over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, we are troubled by the Department’s lack of transparency and failure to engage meaningfully with our committee as these procedures were developed. We request that the Department amend the FISC Procedures to comply with the Constitution and RISAA,” the lawmakers wrote.

RISAA – signed into law in April 2024 – requires DOJ to allow select members of Congress and designated staff to attend and conduct oversight of FISC proceedings. In November 2024, the Biden DOJ implemented a policy that requires members of Congress and their staff to agree to a series of arbitrary and inappropriate procedures before being allowed to attend FISC proceedings, which the Trump administration has maintained.

Some of DOJ’s policies and procedures include:

  • Prohibiting members of Congress from sharing information with other members of Congress and members of their staff;
  • Restricting members of Congress from requesting information or documentation from participants of FISC proceedings;
  • Allowing DOJ staff to remove congressional observers, including members of Congress, from FISC proceedings at any time and at the sole discretion of DOJ;
  • Allowing only a limited number of congressional observers to attend FISC proceedings at any one time;
  • Prohibiting designated staff from attending the same FISC proceeding as their specified member of Congress; and
  • Prohibiting note taking during proceedings, despite congressional staff’s ability to maintain classified notebooks.

Read Grassley and Durbin’s letter to DOJ HERE or below.

Keep reading

FBI Director Kash Patel EXPOSES Obama-Clinton Grand Conspiracy with Larry Kudlow — CONFIRMS Russiagate, FISA Court Abuses, and Mar-a-Lago Raid Was a Political Hit Job

FBI Director Kash Patel joined Larry Kudlow in a bombshell interview this week, and it’s ten minutes every American needs to see.

On Larry Kudlow’s show, FBI Director Kash Patel unleashed a series of bombshells that confirm what millions of Americans have long suspected: Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were the masterminds behind the phony Russiagate hoax and the illegal invasion of President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home.

Now, Patel has confirmed it on national television, Obama and Hillary Clinton were at the very top of the conspiracy.

Kudlow pressed Patel on how the FBI could justify invading the private home of a former president, something unprecedented in American history.

Patel laid it out plainly: Russiagate, the FISA Court abuses, and the Mar-a-Lago raid were all connected. A “political operation,” not a legitimate investigation.

Kudlow also asked Patel point-blank if Obama and Hillary were the architects of this grand conspiracy.

Keep reading

NYT Reports FBI Closing FISA Office. FBI Denies It

FBI Director Kash Patel closed the agency’s surveillance watchdog unit, according to a Tuesday report by The New York Times (NYT).

The bureau’s Office of Internal Auditing ensured compliance with surveillance regulations, specifically concerning the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), officials familiar told NYT.

“The FBI’s Office of Internal Auditing is not being shut down; it is being moved to the Inspection Division which is responsible for internal reviews of FBI policies, programs, and investigations to ensure they fully comply with our authorities. Oversight is important to the FBI, and we will continue to work with DOJ’s National Security Division for FISA review. The FBI is committed to ensuring that we are fully compliant with querying standards,” the FBI told the Daily Caller in a statement.

The assistant director of that department, Cindy Hall, has retired, according to the outlet. While a former official was informed she was “forced out,” another source familiar told NYT the FBI described her exit to Congress as “voluntary.”

Prior to the reported closure, Hall was working to onboard workers to expand the office’s operations, according to NYT.

The watchdog’s closure is part of a broader restructuring, people familiar told the outlet. The office’s functions, along with The Office of Integrity and Compliance, “have been absorbed by the inspection division,” NYT reported.

Keep reading

A New Administration, Same Old Support for FISA

American politicians love to tell the citizenry exactly what they are going to do for them. They claim they will install programs for the poor, increase domestic security, strengthen our international image, and fight tirelessly for their constituencies’ rights. But are these even things people want from their elected leaders?

Democrats and Republicans are typically somewhat on the fence about this question in that they like government intervention and force so long as they are used to further their partisan political ambitions. When it comes to libertarian voters, on the other hand, the answer is likely no. Rather, what most libertarians want is the one thing that a politician will never promise: that they will do absolutely nothing and leave everyone alone!

Even if libertarians are technically in the statistical minority, they have noticed a worrying trend and are using the amplifying power of social media to make it a national debate. More specifically, the internet has now made it almost impossible for the enemies of liberty to hide, and this has led to a growing Massie/Paul-led public referendum against our politicians’ unsavory relationship with warrantless spying. Ideally, this referendum will transcend libertarian circles and will grow so large that it infiltrates the ranks of the Democrats and, more importantly, the Republicans.

To give some context, The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), which is generally associated with the global War on Terror, was actually around decades before 9/11, even though very few people knew about it. This ambiguity existed, in part, because communications technology before the internet was not nearly as sophisticated or intrusive as it is now. However, after this act became supercharged with the adoption of the Patriot Act in 2001 and then the addition of Section 702 in 2008, its days in the dark were over, and unfortunately, so were our days of assumed privacy.

Even though the internet is waking up to the heinous unconstitutionality of these pieces of legislation, the politicians, on the other hand, don’t seem to be listening, a problem that, ironically, is more prevalent among the self-proclaimed “freedom-loving” MAGA Republicans than it is among the “uni party deep-state” Democrats.

Keep reading

Federal Court Rules Warrant is Required for Section 702 Backdoor Searches of Americans’ Communications

A federal district court has delivered a pivotal ruling that strikes at the heart of unchecked government surveillance. In the criminal case United States v. Hasbajrami, the court determined that backdoor searches of vast databases containing Americans’ private communications — collected under Section 702 — typically require a warrant. This judgment comes after more than a decade of legal battles and follows the Second Circuit Court of Appeals’ 2019 finding that such searches constitute “separate Fourth Amendment events,” leaving it to the lower court to address the warrant requirement. That question has now been resolved.

Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) grants the intelligence community the authority to collect communications between foreign targets, ostensibly for national security purposes.

However, when these exchanges involve individuals on US soil, their communications are also intercepted and stored. Federal agencies have claimed that accessing this data for searches doesn’t require additional judicial oversight. For years privacy groups have argued this practice violates the Fourth Amendment. Now, a court has finally concurred.

The case revolves around Agron Hasbajrami, a US resident arrested at JFK airport in 2011 as he prepared to travel to Pakistan. He was accused of providing material support to terrorists. The government later disclosed that its evidence included emails between Hasbajrami and an unnamed foreigner allegedly “linked” to terrorist groups. These emails had been warrantlessly collected through Section 702 programs and later searched — again without a warrant — using terms associated with Hasbajrami.

While Section 702 permits the surveillance of communications involving foreign nationals, the court ruled that such a broad “foreign intelligence exception” cannot routinely override the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement when those communications are searched by law enforcement.

Keep reading

Court Rules Warrantless Section 702 Searches Violated the Fourth Amendment

In a long-awaited ruling in United States v. Hasbajrami, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York last night held that warrantless queries — or searches — conducted under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act violated the Fourth Amendment. The ruling is the first of its kind, and it follows years of public revelations about how Section 702 has been used by the government to conduct warrantless surveillance of Americans, including protesters, members of Congress, and journalists.

The court’s opinion addresses numerous queries the FBI conducted of the defendant, Mr. Agron Hasbajrami, during an investigation years ago. The government initially hid its use of Section 702 in Mr. Hasbajrami’s case and others, reversing course only after the Department of Justice’s policy of wrongly concealing Section 702 surveillance in criminal cases came to light.

“This is a major constitutional ruling on one of the most abused provisions of FISA,” said Patrick Toomey, deputy director of ACLU’s National Security Project. “As the court recognized, the FBI’s rampant digital searches of Americans are an immense invasion of privacy, and trigger the bedrock protections of the Fourth Amendment. Section 702 is long overdue for reform by Congress, and this opinion shows why.”

The decision follows a groundbreaking 2019 ruling by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which recognized that Section 702 queries of people in the United States are searches that trigger separate Fourth Amendment scrutiny. The court of appeals sent the case back to the lower court for further constitutional analysis, culminating in yesterday’s ruling. While the new opinion holds that the FBI’s Section 702 queries violated the Fourth Amendment, the court ultimately denied the defendant’s motion to suppress the resulting evidence on separate grounds.

Keep reading

The Predictable Capitulation of Tulsi Gabbard

Well, Tulsi Gabbard now says she is all for the unconstitutional law that permits the national security state to surveil Americans without obtaining legal warrants beforehand — a law Donald Trump’s nominee for director of national intelligence has previously and vigorously pledged to repeal.

As President-elect Trump’s inauguration approaches and his cabinet appointments will be confirmed or rejected in Senate hearings, Gabbard’s in-your-face betrayal of public trust ought to focus our minds very sharply and very fast. Some of these minds, I will say straightaway, have drifted far from reality since Trump began announcing his nominees. This was especially so in the case of Gabbard. 

As soon as Trump proposed Gabbard as his DNI, the shared expectation in some quarters, most of whose inhabitants I respect, was that she would — singlehandedly, I gathered from the commentaries — bring the hydra-headed monster euphemistically called “the intelligence community” under some semblance of political-civilian control. 

And now this: Professing support for Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act after opposing it for years, Gabbard seems to have shocked a lot of people. Reading this in the large, she has just told America it’s the same old imperium after all.  

Shall we join to sing “Up, Up, and Away” now that all the beautiful balloons have fallen to Earth and the world’s not a nicer place and doesn’t wear a nicer face?

Until her stunning volte-face last weekend, Gabbard had been single-mindedly steadfast in her opposition to many FISA provisions, notably but not only Section 702. A lot of people, I among them, put this among the most significant positions Gabbard, the former congresswoman, had taken on any policy question.

Keep reading

Gabbard reverses course on key intel-gathering tool as nomination teeters

Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for director of national intelligence, is changing her tune on a key intelligence-gathering authority she once sought to repeal as her Senate confirmation hangs in the balance.

Gabbard’s past criticisms of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act have emerged as a central issue in her confirmation process, leaving GOP senators — including some in leadership — increasingly skeptical about the former Democrat’s confirmation prospects.

In her first public comments since being nominated, Gabbard told us in an exclusive statement that she now supports Section 702, saying the program is “crucial” and “must be safeguarded to protect our nation while ensuring the civil liberties of Americans.”

“If confirmed as DNI, I will uphold Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights while maintaining vital national security tools like Section 702 to ensure the safety and freedom of the American people,” Gabbard said.

In private meetings, senators are questioning Gabbard about legislation she introduced in 2020 that would repeal Section 702.

However, Gabbard now appears to be walking that back, citing Fourth Amendment protections implemented since then to prevent the incidental collection of Americans’ data:

“My prior concerns about FISA were based on insufficient protections for civil liberties, particularly regarding the FBI’s misuse of warrantless search powers on American citizens. Significant FISA reforms have been enacted since my time in Congress to address these issues.”

Inside Gabbard’s Senate meetings: Multiple senators from both parties who met with the former Hawaii lawmaker in recent days told us they emerged from those sessions unsure about Gabbard’s position on the 702 program. During these meetings, senators have pressed Gabbard on her previous public statements on the issue, as well as her votes against 702 reauthorization throughout her eight years in Congress.

Keep reading

After Expanding Warrantless Surveillance The FBI Is Playing Politics With Your Privacy

A bombshell report from WIRED reveals that two days after the U.S. Congress renewed and expanded the mass-surveillance authority Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the deputy director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Paul Abbate, sent an email imploring agents to “use” Section 702 to search the communications of Americans collected under this authority “to demonstrate why tools like this are essential” to the FBI’s mission.

In other words, an agency that has repeatedly abused this exact authority—with 3.4 million warrantless searches of Americans’ communications in 2021 alone, thinks that the answer to its misuse of mass surveillance of Americans is to do more of it, not less. And it signals that the FBI believes it should do more surveillance–not because of any pressing national security threat—but because the FBI has an image problem.

The American people should feel a fiery volcano of white hot rage over this revelation. During the recent fight over Section 702’s reauthorization, we all had to listen to the FBI and the rest of the Intelligence Community downplay their huge number of Section 702 abuses (but, never fear, they were fixed by drop-down menus!). The government also trotted out every monster of the week in incorrect arguments seeking to undermine the bipartisan push for crucial reforms. Ultimately, after fighting to a draw in the House, Congress bent to the government’s will: it not only failed to reform Section 702, but gave the government authority to use Section 702 in more cases.

Now, immediately after extracting this expanded power and fighting off sensible reforms, the FBI’s leadership is urging the agency to “continue to look for ways” to make more use of this controversial authority to surveil Americans, albeit with the fig leaf that it must be “legal.” And not because of an identifiable, pressing threat to national security, but to “demonstrate” the importance of domestic law enforcement accessing the pool of data collected via mass surveillance. This is an insult to everyone who cares about accountability, civil liberties, and our ability to have a private conversation online. It also raises the question of whether the FBI is interested in keeping us safe or in merely justifying its own increased powers.

Keep reading

Senate Passes FISA Reauthorization in Late-Night Vote

The Senate in the early hours of April 20 voted to reauthorize a controversial spying power that briefly lapsed after a late-night vote series.

The Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, which reauthorizes Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) for two years, passed in a 60–34 vote that concluded 45 minutes after the 12 a.m. ET deadline.

The bill, passed earlier in the week by the House, will now go to President Joe Biden’s desk. He’s called the reauthorization of the program “critical,” and is expected to swiftly sign the bill into law.

The vote came after lingering disagreements over the controversial surveillance program had Senate leadership scrambling to strike a deal on the rules of debate and amendments.

Lawmakers took votes on a series of amendments that would strengthen civil liberty protections.

However, none of these—including an amendment by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) to require a warrant to search Americans’ Section 702 data and another by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to prohibit federal law enforcement from purchasing Americans’ data from third-party brokers—were passed by the Senate.

Keep reading