Lawmakers Use Terrorist Alert to Ratchet Up Calls for FISA Reforms

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
©2013 Richard A. Bloom
Stacy Kaper
Aug. 7, 2013, 12:24 p.m.

Law­makers’ con­cerns about Amer­ic­ans’ pri­vacy, in par­tic­u­lar the Na­tion­al Se­cur­ity Agency’s do­mest­ic sur­veil­lance pro­grams, have not dampened over re­cess.

In fact, some law­makers are mak­ing the ar­gu­ment that the ramped-up state of na­tion­al se­cur­ity that has promp­ted em­bassy clos­ures across North Africa and the Middle East amid an al-Qaida ter­ror­ist alert only el­ev­ates the need to strengthen Amer­ic­ans’ trust in U.S. coun­terter­ror­ism tac­tics.

“It is very im­port­ant to em­phas­ize that the latest se­cur­ity alert and threat warn­ing re­mind us how crit­ic­al the work of our in­tel­li­gence and coun­terter­ror­ism people and agen­cies is to our na­tion,” Sen. Richard Blu­menth­al, D-Conn., said in an in­ter­view. “It de­mands and de­serves the re­spect and trust of the Amer­ic­an people, which is why we need my re­form pro­pos­als to pre­serve, re­in­force, and bol­ster the trust and cred­ib­il­ity of those in­sti­tu­tions.”

He ad­ded, “Most es­pe­cially the FISA Court. “¦ It’s an an­om­aly right now be­cause it’s a black box.”

Blu­menth­al is slated to give a ma­jor policy ad­dress on FISA court re­form Thursday at Har­vard Law School, ar­guing for the need to bet­ter bal­ance Amer­ic­ans’ pri­vacy while main­tain­ing strong na­tion­al se­cur­ity pro­vi­sions. The FISA courts gov­ern re­quests for sur­veil­lance war­rants against sus­pec­ted for­eign-in­tel­li­gence agents in­side the U.S. 

He is push­ing for two bills he in­tro­duced with Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Tom Ud­all, D-N.M., just be­fore Con­gress ad­journed last week that would provide a spe­cial ad­voc­ate to the FISA courts to ar­gue for Amer­ic­ans’ right to pri­vacy and an­oth­er to change the FISA judge se­lec­tion pro­cess to force great­er di­versity of view­points and back­grounds.

It is un­clear which if any re­forms will be­come law, but policy ana­lysts agree that mo­mentum is grow­ing in Con­gress to ad­dress the scope of the FISA court.

Last month, Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich., sent a wake-up call to the ad­min­is­tra­tion and NSA de­fend­ers when he came just a hand­ful of votes shy of suc­ceed­ing on a meas­ure that would have stopped the NSA’s blanket col­lec­tion of tele­phone re­cords of Amer­ic­ans not un­der sus­pi­cion of ter­ror­ism ties.

An even strong NSA de­fend­er, Sen­ate In­tel­li­gence Com­mit­tee Chair­wo­man Di­anne Fein­stein, D-Cal­if., has sug­ges­ted re­du­cing how much so-called metadata the NSA re­tains.

“It’s very likely we’ll see some re­form,” said Steven Bucci, a dir­ect­or of for­eign policy stud­ies with the Her­it­age Found­a­tion, who noted that law­makers’ ques­tions and con­cerns ap­pear to be in­tensi­fy­ing. “Very clearly there is a crit­ic­al mass of le­gis­lat­ors and cit­izens who dis­agree with people like me who think this a good bal­ance of pri­vacy and se­cur­ity.”

Mi­chael O’Han­lon, a seni­or fel­low with the Brook­ings In­sti­tu­tion, said that “the nat­ur­al com­prom­ise hasn’t yet sur­faced,” but law­makers ap­pear in­tent on some re­form.

“I’d pre­dict that Con­gress will want to do something more than simply re­gister its con­cerns and com­plaints,” he said. “There will be on­go­ing vig­or­ous dis­cus­sion.”

Blu­menth­al told Na­tion­al Journ­al Daily that he sees con­sti­tu­tion­al freedoms in jeop­ardy, which he said is even more crit­ic­al in the face of the latest ter­ror­ism alert.

“The core mes­sage will be that we can do both — pre­serve liberty and pri­vacy, and safe­guard na­tion­al se­cur­ity,” he said, pre­view­ing his Har­vard ad­dress. “The chal­lenge is to strike bal­ance.”

Blu­menth­al is con­tinu­ing to push to de­clas­si­fy the courts’ opin­ions be­cause they in ef­fect cre­ate law.

“The FISA court is un­known to many Amer­ic­ans. But it ex­er­cises vast in­vis­ible power,” he said. “The court makes law, but right now it’s secret law, and I think there is a point of con­sensus here that the law at the very least should be made pub­lic, and that is one of the points I’m go­ing to be stress­ing.”

Blu­menth­al said that voters have un­answered ques­tions about the gov­ern­ment’s sur­veil­lance pro­grams.

“I see no pro­spect of the is­sue dis­sip­at­ing either in im­port­ance or pub­lic con­cern,” he said. “I don’t see the is­sue go­ing away dur­ing the re­cess. In fact, when I go around the state of Con­necti­c­ut, a lot of folks are talk­ing about the sur­veil­lance, and the good as well as the bad.”

What We're Following See More »
IN ADDITION TO DNC AND DCCC
Clinton Campaign Also Hacked
8 hours ago
THE LATEST
1.5 MILLION MORE TUNED IN FOR TRUMP
More People Watched Trump’s Acceptance Speech
8 hours ago
THE DETAILS

Hillary Clinton hopes that television ratings for the candidates' acceptance speeches at their respective conventions aren't foreshadowing of similar results at the polls in November. Preliminary results from the networks and cable channels show that 34.9 million people tuned in for Donald Trump's acceptance speech while 33.3 million watched Clinton accept the Democratic nomination. However, it is still possible that the numbers are closer than these ratings suggest: the numbers don't include ratings from PBS or CSPAN, which tend to attract more Democratic viewers.

Source:
AFFECTS NOVEMBER ELECTIONS
North Carolina Voter ID Law Struck Down
11 hours ago
THE DETAILS

The US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday overturned North Carolina's 2013 voter ID law, saying it was passed with “discriminatory intent." The decision sends the case back to the district judge who initially dismissed challenges to the law. "The ruling prohibits North Carolina from requiring photo identification from voters in future elections, including the November 2016 general election, restores a week of early voting and preregistration for 16- and 17-year-olds, and ensures that same-day registration and out-of-precinct voting will remain in effect."

Source:
×