The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has approved President Obama’s changes to the National Security Agency program that collects records on virtually all U.S. phone calls, the administration announced late Thursday.
In a bid to ease growing outrage over NSA surveillance, Obama announced immediate changes last month to the controversial program, which was first revealed by Edward Snowden. Obama ordered the NSA to seek court approval every time it wants to access the vast database of phone records. NSA analysts were previously supposed to have a “reasonable, articulable suspicion” that a phone number was associated with terrorism before accessing its call records — but it was up to the NSA and not any outside judge to make that determination.
Obama also reduced the degrees of separation that NSA analysts could stray from their initial target from three to two.
According to the announcement by the director of national intelligence, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees the NSA programs, approved Obama’s new tougher privacy standards on Wednesday. The actual court ruling remains secret.
The approval is unsurprising as the court had already approved the less stringent standards on numerous occasions.
In his speech last month, Obama also directed Attorney General Eric Holder and top intelligence officials to develop a plan for the NSA to give up control over the massive phone database. The details of how the NSA could continue mining the records for possible terrorist connections while not retaining control of the database remain unclear.
For now, the NSA will continue its sweeps of billions of phone records.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy applauded the new limits on the NSA data collection, but he vowed to continue pushing his legislation to end the program altogether.
“I am glad to see that the administration is moving forward to impose important safeguards on its bulk collection of Americans’ phone records,” Leahy said. “But we must do more than just reform the government’s bulk phone records collection program; we should shut it down.”
What We're Following See More »
"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."
"Federal regulators on Thursday delayed a vote on a proposal to reshape the television market by freeing consumers from cable box rentals, putting into doubt a plan that has pitted technology companies against cable television providers. ... The proposal will still be considered for a future vote. But Tom Wheeler, chairman of the F.C.C., said commissioners needed more discussions."
"The Supreme Court is taking up a First Amendment clash over the government’s refusal to register offensive trademarks, a case that could affect the Washington Redskins in their legal fight over the team name. The justices agreed Thursday to hear a dispute involving an Asian-American rock band called the Slants, but they did not act on a separate request to hear the higher-profile Redskins case at the same time." Still, any precedent set by the case could have ramifications for the Washington football team.