Republicans Split on Whether FBI Should Be Able To Snoop Without a Warrant
A Section 702 reauthorization moving through Congress could actually weaken privacy protections.

Section 702, the controversial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) authority used to justify snooping on Americans' digital communications without a warrant, is set to sunset on April 19 if lawmakers don't act. Many in Congress—including Republicans and Democrats—want Section 702 reauthorization that includes reforms to shield innocent Americans from warrantless surveillance and to hold federal agents accountable for misuse.
But as a "compromise" reauthorization measure comes before Congress this week, House Republicans are split on what sort of reform is really needed—and the side dismissive of civil liberties seems to be winning out.
"The House appears ready to reauthorize FISA 702—which has been abused literally hundreds of thousands of times to spy on Americans without a warrant—without requiring the government to get a warrant," complained Sen. Mike Lee (R–Utah) on X (formerly Twitter) this week. A proposal put forth by Lee and Illinois Republican Sen. Dick Durbin would substantially limit warrantless access to communications obtained under Section 702. But House Speaker Mike Johnson (R–La.) "has declined to bring that bill to the floor, opting instead to have members vote on a 'compromise' measure—one that would compromise the rights of Americans if passed without amendments," as Lee put it.
Johnson's measure—H.R. 7888, the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA)—was adopted 9 to 2 by the House Committee on the Rules yesterday.
RISAA and several amendments to it are now expected to get a full House vote tomorrow. And "the Senate is anticipated to pass whatever bill the House sends its way," notes Axios.
You are reading Sex & Tech, from Elizabeth Nolan Brown. Get more of Elizabeth's sex, tech, bodily autonomy, law, and online culture coverage.
RISAA Would 'Actively Weaken Existing Protections'
RISAA is allegedly a compromise between the Protect Liberty and End Warrantless Surveillance Act ( H.R. 6570 ), which was passed by the House Judiciary Committee, and the Intelligence Committee's preferred bill, known as the FISA Reform and Reauthorization Act of 2023 ( H.R. 6611). But in actuality, it leans much more heavily into the intelligence committee's wants.
Of the 56 "reforms" contained in RISAA, nearly a quarter "either codify existing practice and procedures (under which abuses are continuing to occur), or actively weaken existing protections," according to a document put out by the Brennan Center for Justice, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), and FreedomWorks.
One provision of the bill could permanently reauthorize Section 702 (as it stands, it must be reauthorized every four years).
Rules Committee members debated fiercely during yesterday's hearing. The Brennan Center's Noah Chauvin details these debates deftly in an X thread that starts here.
RISAA does contain some nods to due process, but they'll make little difference, according to those who want to see significant reforms.
"RISAA's marquee reform is a prohibition on the FBI conducting backdoor searches intended to find evidence of a crime unconnected to foreign intelligence," note Chauvin and Elizabeth Goitein at Just Security:
But such searches represent a vanishingly small number of backdoor searches overall. Of the more than 200,000 backdoor searches intelligence agencies performed in 2022, for example, this prohibition would have stopped them from accessing the contents of Americans' communications just twice. Moreover, the most egregious abuses of Section 702, including the baseless searches mentioned above for the communications of 141 Black Lives Matter protesters, sitting members of Congress, and 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign, were all justified as having an ostensible foreign intelligence purpose.
Or, as the Brennan Center puts it:
The bill's leading "reform" is a prohibition on backdoor searches performed for the sole purpose of finding evidence of a crime—i.e., with no foreign intelligence purpose. As the bill's drafters know, however, the FBI almost never labels its searches "evidence-of-a-crime only." In 2022, a year in which the FBI conducted 204,090 backdoor searches, this prohibition would have stopped the FBI from accessing Section 702 data in only two cases. This prohibition would not have prevented any of the egregious abuses cited above, all of which were purportedly intended to find foreign intelligence.
Turner-Hines Amendment 'Would Expand Warrantless FISA Surveillance Dramatically'
Proposed amendments to the measure are a mixed bag. One promising bipartisan amendment would ban "warrantless searches of U.S. person communications in the FISA 702 database, with exceptions for imminent threats to life or bodily harm, consent searches, or known cybersecurity threat signatures."
But others would allow Section 702 databases to be used to "enable the vetting of all non-United States persons who are being processed for travel to the United States," and expand the categories of businesses that must help the government in its snooping efforts. The latter amendment is being put forth by Reps. Mike Turner (R–Ohio) and Jim Hines (D–Conn.), both leaders on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
The goal of the Turner-Himes amendment is "to overrule decisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (FISCR) interpreting the current statutory definition of 'electronic communication service providers' (ECSPs) eligible to receive FISA 702 directives much more narrowly than the government wanted," according to ZwillGenBlog:
Consistent with the plain statutory language, those decisions appear to have excluded from compelled assistance under FISA 702 non-communication service providers who lack direct access to communications streams but who merely have access to equipment on which communications are transmitted or stored.
The new amendment…(1) drops the qualifier 'communication' from the class of covered 'service providers;' (2) makes access to communications-carrying equipment enough to establish eligibility; and (3) adds 'custodian' to the list of individuals who can be forced to provide assistance.
The new amendment would—notwithstanding these exclusions—still permit the government to compel the assistance of a wide range of additional entities and persons in conducting surveillance under FISA 702. The breadth of the new definition is obvious from the fact that the drafters felt compelled to exclude such ordinary places such as senior centers, hotels, and coffee shops. But for these specific exceptions, the scope of the new definition would cover them—and scores of businesses that did not receive a specific exemption remain within its purview.
This amendment "would expand warrantless FISA surveillance dramatically," writes the Center for Democracy and Technology's Jake Laperruque. " While falsely billing itself as a minor definitional tweak, in reality the amendment would be the largest expansion of FISA since Section 702 was created in 2008. It could be used to enlist an array of sensitive facilities—such as offices for nonprofits, political campaigns, and news organizations—to serve as hubs for warrantless surveillance."
'The Constitution Is Clear: Get a Warrant.'
"The Constitution is clear: get a warrant," said Rep. Thomas Massie (R–Ky.), who has long opposed Section 702's use for warrantless searches of American communications.
Section 702 was passed as part of a 2008 bill amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978. Theoretically, the provision only grants government snoops the right to collect and search digital communications from non-citizens located outside of the U.S. But in the course of doing this, intelligence agencies collect all sorts of communications from American citizens within U.S. borders. They do this via "upstream" surveillance" (spying on communications as they're transmitted over the internet) and "downstream surveillance" (collecting communications from internet companies like Yahoo, Google, and Facebook). And they do this without a warrant.
"As the law is written, the intelligence community cannot use Section 702 programs to target Americans, who are protected by the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures," notes the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "But the law gives the intelligence community space to target foreign intelligence in ways that inherently and intentionally sweep in Americans' communications."
Under FISA, intelligence agencies are allowed to gather information on any foreign person located outside of the U.S. if that person is believed to have "foreign intelligence information" (a broad and opaque category). They're also allowed to collect communications to or from these foreign targets, even when these communications come to or from Americans. These communications are then stored in searchable databases.
The databases "are routinely searched by the FBI when starting—or even before officially starting—investigations into domestic crimes that may ultimately have nothing to do with foreign intelligence issues," notes EFF.
And the FBI does a lot of this. For instance, in 2021, "the FBI reported that it ran 3.4 million [later revised down to 2.97 million] U.S. person queries of Section 702-acquired information in all its systems," according to a Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) report published last fall. And documents declassified last year "offered glimpses of how FISA is misused, including improper FBI surveillance of a U.S. senator, a state lawmaker, and a judge," noted J.D. Tuccille.
For more than a decade, privacy and civil liberties advocates have been trying to reform this process. But bipartisan support in Congress has failed to get reforms over the finish line. (Meanwhile, "the number of Section 702 targets has expanded dramatically, almost doubling since the program was last reauthorized, and now stands at approximately a quarter million people," as Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden wrote in January.)
Last December, "a bipartisan effort to reform or shutter the federal government's massive warrantless spying regime ended…in failure," Reason's Eric Boehm reported at the time. Temporary Section 702 reauthorization was passed as part of a military funding package. "A group of Republicans led efforts in both chambers to remove a temporary reauthorization of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act," noted Boehm. But their efforts failed.
So here we are again. And it doesn't look like we're any closer this time to actually seeing significant reform.
Today's Image

More Sex and Tech News
• "The Arizona Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a 160-year-old law that bans abortions and punishes doctors who provide them, saying the ban that existed before Arizona became a state can be enforced going forward," the Arizona Republic reports.
• "Already this year, lawmakers in more than 15 states have introduced bills to impose harsh penalties on libraries or librarians," reports the Associated Press. The bills seek to punish libraries that don't shield children from sexual material.
• College students on how a TikTok ban would affect them.
• "Age verification is a trojan horse for Internet surveillance": a thread.
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.
Please
to post comments
It’s impossible to know which side is correct until Trump weighs in. Whichever side he supports are the real Republicans.
Poor sarc.
Golly Sarc, looking at ENB's headline and can you make a guess which party is solidly for allowing the FBI to snoop without warrant, and which party has most of the holdouts against?
BUT WAIT... what's this!?
Trump allies defy Speaker Mike Johnson and TANK reauthorization of controversial spy tool as Republican chaos continues: Former president urged GOP to 'kill' critical bill to thwart terrorist plots
OH NO!!! DISASTER!!!
So sorry this happened to you!
He gave up even pretending to be neutral this morning. Shrike, Jeff and him must have a rental at a half million dollar AirBnB.
They're going to need something bigger than Pluggo's windowless white cargo van to haul Jeff. Maybe they can rent a flatbed.
Add some roll bars to help the roof support Jeff's fat rolls?
Well there you go. The ones who want to kill the bill are the real Republicans. The rest are RINOs.
Notice though that he’s not opposed to it in principle. Only because it was used against him personally.
As I keep saying, I don’t give him much credit when he gets things right. Because he will change his mind at any moment if it suits him personally.
You dont give him credit because youre a gaslighting democrat lol.
Next you’ll claim the uniparry is made up. The same group voted against it last time it came up.
Youre such a leftist clown now lol.
Lol, here’s sarc admitting he won’t give Trump credit even when he’s right.
What’s TDS? That is.
"Notice though that he’s not opposed to it in principle. Only because it was used against him personally."
Trump said he was opposed to it in principle, he used the highly illegal spying on his campaign as an example. The journalist claimed it was actually because it was used against him personally.
The journalist also says "Nineteen far-right Republicans banded together to tank the vote".
Isn't that frightening? The far-right and their penchant for blocking government snoops?
"It was the seventh rule vote to fail this Congress, fourth under Speaker Mike Johnson. A rule hadn't failed in over 20 years before this Congress as the majority party usually didn't resort to such tactics to paralyze House business."
Horrific, huh? Stopping the rubber-stamping of Gestapo orders. Ultra-right.
"A report from May 2023 detailed how the FBI used Section 702 to 'query' - or search - names of individuals who were suspected of being on the Capitol grounds during the January 6, 2021 riot, Black Lives Matters protestors, victims of crime and their families and donors to one congressional campaign.
In total, the FBI misused Section 702 over 278,000 times - according to the document.
While many of Section 702's uses remain classified, intelligence officials leaked late last year that they had used the controversial tool to thwart weapons sales to Iran... Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) has been credited for helping intelligence officers thwart terror attacks on U.S. soil"
Sure they used it to illegally spy on campaign donors BUT IRANIAN TERRORISM, and Trump said it was bad!
https://justthenews.com/government/congress/house-blocks-fisa-reauthorization-bill
Trump is against it. This must be horrible for you.
sarcasmic 3 months ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
I’m saying that some people are so despicable that I’d rather disagree with them then have something in common with them.
Good thing the dems are unified they should. Otherwise the FBI might get reigned in, and that would be a threat to democracy.
ENB is a hack.
>>is set to sunset on April 19 if lawmakers don't act.
tie their hands to their chairs until 4/20. anyone not on the side of burn it to the ground is no true speech-restricted scotsman
4/20 hehehehehehe
When is the last time lawmakers "acted" on anything useful ?
right.
“Age verification is a trojan horse for Internet surveillance”: a thread.
Section 231 of the CDA, which contained copious amounts of age verification and age restrictions, was a trojan horse for internet surveillance but Section 230 of the same law totally isn’t a trojan horse for internet censorship and is totally the 1A of the internet despite providing protection for Good Samaritan blocking and screening of offensive speech.
Who knows? She linked to twitter, and so I won't read it.
I swear to God, journalists need to stop linking to Twitter. It's embarrassing.
I used to think that, then I created an account just to support Elon buying it and opening it up more for free speech. If you follow independent journalists and libertarian influencers it’s very informative.
Nothing like Facebook at all.
My main gripe with Twitter (Currently X) is that the character limit doesn't seem to really limit people and you end up with "threads" 20 or 30 posts long. Like, get a fucking blog bro.
Limit only exists for the non paying masses. Paid accounts have no limit.
Forcing me to pay for that shitshow of a "blog" so I can post more characters doesn't make it better. And routing users from your blog site to it is fucking retarded. Not quite like embedding the instagram links retarded, but still embarrassing.
I just don't get twitter. Never have. If you dig it, help yourself. But I totally agree with super scary. It's not a website for me.
God. I’ve been back reading Reason for 10 minutes and I’m already getting frustrated at ENB’s writing again.
Things never change. Are they running that lady from 2020 in 2024 again too?
Don't worry. Good Liz is on the what used to be AM links beat now...and while not perfect she calls it much better (and with proper snark). ENB gets a few articles a week to put up the obvious partisan attack but now she has a little Sex News section of links at the end of her articles.
I mourn the loss of the English language to further erosions like "compromise" which now seems to mean "continue to give ground further and further away from the previous status quo." Of course it's never back away from previous concessions during previous "compromises." The new definition of "compromise" scheduled for revision in the next edition of the Oxford Dictionary: "Cave in completely and abandon your remaining responsibilities."
So I assume your marxist buddies in the Democrat party are all United in unlimited spying on evil Republican. Good proggy hack ENB, nice work with the propaganda.
sorry but i dont believe anyone in congress is agonizing over this. The ones pretending to be against it are just playing the role of loyal opposition to the uniparty total state machine.
They all want to have full snoop on all of us with no limits.
I think Massie and a few other members of the freedom caucus are sincere.
Maybe Reasom should be more supportive of those folks rather than trashing them like during the Mccarthy fight...
They don’t hate Trump so they’re racists.
Drain the Swamp! Fight the Deep State! But not this year.
Repeal the Patriot Act! Bushpig! Eventually, after we get Snowden.
I’m starting to think our major party leaders don’t mean what they say and just pay lip service on the issue of government surveillance.
Many in Congress—including Republicans and Democrats
Including Republicans and Democrats... Can't bothsides harder than that.
But the Republicans are pouncing.
If this information being skimmed were only being used to go after criminals, there would at least be some justification for it. But it is being used to create criminals. It is being used to invent crimes.
"A proposal put forth by Lee and Illinois Republican Sen. Dick Durbin"
As amusing as it would be for that guy to switch parties, mostly to watch the MSNBC crowd lose their sh^t, Senator Dick Durbin is still a Democrat.
We don't actually have any Republicans in Illinois.
"Republicans Split on Whether FBI Should Be Able To Snoop Without a Warrant"
What a terrible headline. It should read, "Democrats Favor FBI Being Able To Snoop Without a Warrant, Republicans Split."
That's just cruel. If ENB typed that headline she's have blood pouring out of her ears.
Every thing in the FBI and doj is a traitor and deserves execution
We have seen how corrupt the whole thing is, starting six months or so before the 2016 election.
– in the spring of 2016, FBI contractors (likely working for or associated with the Clinton campaign) made many thousands of database searches of the NSA databases using the FBI’s interface. Maybe more egregious, they were using “about” search terms, in addition to the standard “to” and “from”. It appears that the Clinton campaign had access to that interface, was using it for opposition research, and it is likely that some of the results ended up in the Steele Dossier, funded by the Clinton campaign and DNC.
– The FBI (likely) legally recorded the telephone call between NSA LTG Flynn and the Russian Ambassador. Very likely, there is the equivalent of a standing FISA arrant on the Russian Ambassador, whomever he may be. But then, it was used by the DOJ/FBI in a § 1001 perjury trap against Flynn to force him to resign. There was no indication that anything illegal (for the NSA) to be discussing. Rather, the allegation was that Flynn misstated to the two FBI agents interviewing him what was said on the call, because they knew what Flynn said, because they had the transcript from the call, from the FISA intercept, and he didn’t. Except that his identity was legally supposed to have been minimized, because he was a US Person in the US. And FISA intercepts can be utilized in criminal cases in certain situations, but in this case, the transcript was utilized to create the crime, and not to prove a crime that had otherwise been committed.
– the FBI acquired 4 successive FISA surveillance warrants on Carter Page. He was a former Navy officer, who has been described as a Boy Scout. He routinely reported anything interesting to his CIA contacts that he encountered on his international travels. All of the warrant applications depended on the Steele Dossier, that the FBI knew by then was questionable validity. They had terminated using him after discovering that the dossier had been commissioned by the DNC and Clinton, etc. but they used the Steele Dossier, without disclosing the problems they knew about it. Then, for the third application, they asked the CIA if Page was their asset. They responded that he was. An FBI lawyer reversed that for the application. He was later fired, had his law license briefly suspended, then promptly got it reinstated. The entirety of those paying the price for the lying by commission, but esp by omission, in procuring those FISA warrants, was the firing of the FBI attorney, Peter Strzok, and FBI DD McCabe. Apparently, at least one of them had his firing reversing, restoring his pension.
Page hadn’t been the FBI’s first choice for a FISA warrant. They had an application for another Trump campaign associate rejected by the FISC. So, why was the FBI energetic in and enthusiastic for getting a FISA surveillance warrant on Page, a former Navy officer Boy Scout, in good standing with his handlers at the CIA, when doing so bordered on, and even crossed into, criminality (they knew they wouldn’t be prosecuted for it by their sister organization in the DOJ)? Because of the two hop rule. FISA interception warrants allow interception of communications two hops from the target of the warrant. And who was within two hops of Page. Trump and his inner circle.