|
Why does PPSA oppose a “clean” extension – without any changes or reforms – of the scandal-ridden Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)? Recent history shows how much is at stake when the U.S. House votes in April on whether to reauthorize this surveillance authority, and why Congress must allow time for significant debate and reforms. Section 702 was enacted by Congress to enable U.S. intelligence agencies to surveil foreign threats on foreign soil. The intelligence community maintains that the communications of Americans are swept up in the National Security Agency’s global trawl only “incidentally.” Patrick Eddington, a former CIA officer now a Cato Institute policy analyst, writes that the rub is that “the practice is not incidental but a predictable, systematic, and – from the government’s perspective – valuable byproduct of the program.” Here are some examples of what “incidental” looks like:
Three evils emerge from what has become a routine domestic surveillance program.
The intelligence community objects to this characterization, stoutly maintaining that Section 702 is not directed at Americans. To quote Eddington again: “The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) and multiple congressional oversight reports have documented thousands of such searches annually, many involving wholly domestic criminal investigations with no foreign intelligence nexus.”
PPSA agrees that Section 702 is an important authority, needed to keep Americans safe from foreign threats. We also believe that we can protect civil liberties and national security at the same time. There is no reason for Members of Congress to be panicked by a needless legislative game of chicken. Defenders of civil liberties should stand together to test the value of various reform amendments in the crucible of a much-needed open debate. Comments are closed.
|
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed