Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Congress

A Politically Split Congress Can Perhaps Fuel Federal Surveillance Reforms

Part of a law that authorizes warrantless snooping is about to expire, opening up a opportunity to better protect our privacy rights.

Scott Shackford | 1.13.2023 4:00 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Microchip with National Security Agency logo | Badboo / Dreamstime.com
(Badboo / Dreamstime.com)

The National Security Agency (NSA) is urging Congress to renew its secret surveillance authorities before they expire at the end of the year. Split control of Congress provides an excellent opportunity for lawmakers to take the time to reform these laws so that American citizens have stronger protections from unwarranted snooping that's supposed to only be used to track foreign spies and terrorists.

On Thursday, NSA Director and Army Gen. Paul Nakasone spoke at a virtual panel discussion presented by the U.S. Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board to urge the renewal of "one of the U.S. government's most important intelligence authorities." He's referring to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). FISA authorizes the NSA to engage in secret surveillance to keep track of potential foreign threats, overseen by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which is supposed to make sure that Americans' Fourth Amendment protections against warrantless snooping are honored.

Or that's the ideal, anyway. In reality, particularly in the wake of 9/11, the NSA has repeatedly been caught secretly collecting and tracking far more domestic data than Americans had been told. Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT ACT, passed in 2001, also fueled the secret collection of Americans' online communications and phone records. The extent of the surveillance was partly exposed by Edward Snowden's leaks in 2013, and since then there's been significant political debate over and some modest reforms of these authorities to better protect Americans' data privacy.

We also can't talk about federal surveillance authorities anymore without talking about the federal investigation surrounding President Donald Trump over whether he or his aides had been compromised by Russian interests on the campaign trail leading up to the 2016 election. We've subsequently learned that the FBI had submitted misleading warrant applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to get authorization to wiretap former aide Carter Page. Then we learned that the FBI regularly does a lousy job of properly documenting most of the warrants it submits to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court when asking for permission to snoop on Americans and misuses these authorities to investigate domestic crimes, not foreign espionage.

That surveillance was different from the surveillance authorized by Section 702, but nevertheless, what happened with Page and Trump has caused a greater number of Republicans to be more critical and invested in limiting the power to snoop on Americans. There had always been a handful of Republicans concerned—Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) regularly drew attention to the Fourth Amendment issues at play when Barack Obama was president and long before Trump ever decided to run. But many Republican lawmakers prior to Trump were happy cheerleaders for NSA surveillance, as were many Democrats. There was a small core of bipartisan opponents and critics, but they were typically greatly outnumbered by supporters.

Trump changed that math, and ultimately that's good for American citizens. Trump is, however, part of the reason why Section 702 is still a problem. Despite expressing anger on Twitter about FISA surveillance and the snooping of his staff, he and Republicans nevertheless approved the renewal of these Section 702 authorities in early 2018. In the process, Trump and his Republican allies rejected a bunch of proposed reforms, including one requiring warrants to access any data the NSA incidentally collects from Americans.

But by the end of Trump's term, he was less willing to support the surveillance status quo. As data collection authorities permitted by the USA Freedom Act (which replaced the surveillance authorities once granted by the USA PATRIOT ACT) were set to be renewed in 2020, Trump threatened to veto a renewal bill. Again, some reforms had been proposed but then blocked by the Senate that would have better protected Americans from secret surveillance. But once Trump made his threat, Republicans who had previously voted for renewal changed their stance, and, suddenly, it didn't have enough votes to pass at all. Those authorities ended up sunsetting.

And so, then, the current lack of trust in government and the polarized relationship between the two parties actually makes the prospect of further reforms more possible than it might have been before. Because political party control over both the House and Senate is so narrow, that bipartisan group demanding reform has more power to stop renewal if reforms don't happen. Negotiation may be necessary.

"The American people and indeed people all around the world have lost the ability to have a private conversation over digital networks," Cindy Cohn, executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said during the panel discussion. Now is a great time to amend Section 702 to make sure that Americans have the proper protections against warrantless federal surveillance.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Why Britain's Prime Minister Prefers To See a Private Doctor

Scott Shackford is a policy research editor at Reason Foundation.

CongressSurveillanceNSAEdward SnowdenPrivacyWarrantsFBIRussia ProbeDonald TrumpRand PaulFISAFourth Amendment
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (21)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   2 years ago

    Surprisingly balanced and detailed, with even the Trump mentions more clinical than snotty, and liberty expressly discussed.

    Now if this dispassionate attitude would just carry through to fluidentity genital mutilation, Shackford might recover some of his previous reputation.

    1. angliajone13   2 years ago (edited)

      Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35,000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,100 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
      .
      .
      Just open the link------------------------------->>> http://Www.SmartJob1.Com

      1. JamieRose   2 years ago (edited)

        I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..

        HERE====)> http://WWW.NETPAYFAST.COM

    2. KelseyMurray   2 years ago (edited)

      Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit.. ???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)
      https://WWW.APPRICHS.com

  2. rev-arthur-l-kuckland   2 years ago

    Wait sullum are you agreeing with trump when he says the Intel community is out of control?

    1. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   2 years ago

      Ain't Sullum.

      1. Ted AKA Teddy Salad, CIA/US Ballet Force   2 years ago

        They kind of run together after awhile.

        1. MinnieBlack   2 years ago (edited)

          Making money online is more than $15k just by doing simple work from home. I received $18376 last month. It's an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office jobs and even a little child can do this and earn money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info on this page..... http://Www.workstar24.com

  3. A Cynical Asshole   2 years ago

    The National Security Agency (NSA) is urging Congress to renew its secret surveillance authorities before they expire at the end of the year. Split control of Congress provides an excellent opportunity for lawmakers to take the time to reform these laws so that American citizens have stronger protections from unwarranted snooping

    Why in God's name would they do that? There's a fine line between optimism and being a delusional twat.

    1. ElanorClark   2 years ago (edited)

      I’ve earned $17,910 this month by working online from home. I work only six hours a day despite being a full-time college student. Everyone is capable of carrying out this work from their homes and learning it in spare time on a continuous basis.
      To learn more, see this article———>>> http://Www.Smartcash1.com

  4. Dillinger   2 years ago

    love the idea but the power structure seems entirely larger than 222 (R)s can defeat

  5. Ted AKA Teddy Salad, CIA/US Ballet Force   2 years ago

    Especially when you consider how many of them are paid for swamp creatures.

    1. fixomop   2 years ago (edited)

      I am creating an honest wage from home 1900 Dollars/week , that is wonderful, below a year ago I used to be unemployed during an atrocious economy. I convey God on a daily basis. I used to be endowed with these directions and currently it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with everybody..

      Just open the link————————————–>>OPEN>> https://dailyworls7.blogspot.com/

  6. Chumby   2 years ago

    There won’t be any borrowing to fund this, right?

  7. voluntaryist   2 years ago

    As long as congress has the power to pass laws that violate rights, nothing else matters, e.g., any specific "power".
    The 3 branches have never limited themselves, i.e., their power to rule over the populace. We are "the ruled". That was the political system from the adoption of the constitution. We are not treated as sovereign citizens, and Lincoln destroyed the sovereignty of the states, e.g., "...one nation...", meaning NOT a collection of sovereign states or individuals. Lincoln was a collectivist tyrant who got what he deserved.

    1. motor   2 years ago (edited)

      I have made $16498 in one month by telecommuting. At the point when I lost my office employment multi month prior, I was disturbed and an ineffective go after a quest for new employment I was secured this online position. what’s more, presently I am ready to win thousands from home. Everyone can carry out this responsibility and win more dollars online by follow this link…,.

      More information→→→→→ https://WWW.DAILYPRO7.COM

  8. TJJ2000   2 years ago

    Anyone see a problem here...

    2001 "Emergency Powers" still can't get dismissed in 2023...
    22!!! F'En YEARS later...

  9. Winnie SC   2 years ago

    17 comments - 7 of them are "make money on line" spam.

    I've been flagging these all morning and I'm getting cramps in my clicking finger.

    That said--the author seems to forget that "the intelligence community has six ways to Sunday to get you if they don't like what you say."

    Right Chuck?

  10. damikesc   2 years ago

    Honestly, if it will not provide outsized benefits to one party....it is not going to happen.

    1. pedazyfi   2 years ago (edited)

      Home earnings allow all people to paint on-line and acquire weekly bills to financial institutions. Earn over $500 each day and get payouts each week instantly to account for financial institutions. (bwj-03) My remaining month of earnings was $30,390 and all I do is paint for as much as four hours an afternoon on my computer. Easy paintings and constant earnings are exquisite with this job.

      More information→→→→→ https://WWW.DAILYPRO7.COM

  11. EmilyJohnson   2 years ago (edited)

    I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
    🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)

    Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.SALARYBEZ.COM

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Can We End Racism by Ending the Idea of Race Itself?

Rachel Ferguson | From the June 2025 issue

The Supreme Court Said States Can't Discriminate in Alcohol Sales. They're Doing It Anyway.

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 5.24.2025 7:00 AM

Cocaine Hippos, Monkey Copyrights, and a Horse Named Justice: The Debate Over Animal Personhood

C.J. Ciaramella | From the June 2025 issue

Harvard's Best Protection Is To Get Off the Federal Teat

Autumn Billings | 5.23.2025 6:16 PM

Trump's Mass Cancellation of Student Visas Illustrates the Lawlessness of His Immigration Crackdown

Jacob Sullum | 5.23.2025 5:30 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!