WASHINGTON (TUESDAY, July 29, 2014) — Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on Tuesday introduced legislation that would restore Americans’ privacy rights by ending the government’s dragnet collection of phone records and requiring greater oversight, transparency, and accountability with respect to domestic surveillance authorities.
The updated version of the USA FREEDOM Act released today builds on legislation passed in the House in May, as well as the original legislation Leahy introduced with Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) last October. The legislation bans bulk collection under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act and other surveillance authorities, requires the government to narrow the scope of a search to a clearly defined “specific selection term,” adds needed transparency and reporting requirements, and provides key reforms to the FISA Court. In an editorial on Monday, the New York Times wrote “the bill represents a breakthrough in the struggle against the growth of government surveillance power.”
Leahy noted the legislation provides significant reforms of surveillance authorities, while carefully maintaining the role of law enforcement and intelligence agencies and their responsibility to protect national security.
“If enacted, this bill would represent the most significant reform of government surveillance authorities since Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act 13 years ago,” Leahy said in a floor statement. “This is an historic opportunity, and I am grateful that the bill has the support of the administration, a wide range of privacy and civil liberties groups, and the technology industry.”
Over the last year, the Judiciary Committee under Leahy’s leadership has held six public hearings on the issue of government surveillance. Also during that time, Leahy has worked with the Intelligence Community and a wide range of stakeholders to craft legislation that could garner a broad range of support. The USA FREEDOM Act of 2014 released today is cosponsored by Senators Mike Lee (R-Utah), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Dean Heller (R-Nev.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
Leahy said that additional reforms beyond the USA FREEDOM Act of 2014 will be needed to further protect American’s privacy rights.
“This is a debate about Americans’ fundamental relationship with their government – about whether our government should have the power to create massive databases of information about its citizens,” Leahy said. “I believe strongly that we must impose stronger limits on government surveillance powers – and I am confident that most Vermonters, and most Americans, agree with me. We need to get this right, and we need to get it done without further delay.”
An outline of the USA FREEDOM Act of 2014 can be found here, and text of legislation can be found online. A list of supporters of the legislation can also be found online.
# # # # #
Press Contact
David Carle: 202-224-3693
EW's analysis of Senator Leahy's bill
Blogger Marcy Wheeler has gone over the new bill introduced by Senator Leahy with a fine-toothed comb & written several related posts. Her latest includes links for anyone interested in reading what she has to say:
A Good Idea that May Backfire: FISCR Fast Track
I’ve written several posts about Leahy’s USA Freedom already. To recap:
My last new concern about the bill pertains to a measure that means well, but might backfire.
<snip>
“Historic opportunity” that becomes “history”
It’s a good sign that the bill is cosponsored by Republican and Democrats but it isn’t passed yet, and the political landscape of the Senate and Congress will certainly look different in 4 months, after the November midterm elections, than it does now.
It may be a “historic opportunity” that becomes “history.”
Smart surveillance meters
Smart meter opponents in VT recently contacted Senator Leahy’s Judiciary Committee staffers to request the inclusion of an amendment covering smart meter privacy violations.
The USA Freedom Act aims at restricting unwarranted meta-data collection, and as smart meters fall into this category, they would necessarily be covered.
Request for USA Freedom Act Amendment, HR 3361
As evidenced in the below article, personal, granular, smart meter data is being taken from the home and used by police for illegal search and seizure of private property within the home.
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/8347690-smart-meters-help-cops-identify-and-bust-indoor-marijuana-growing-operations
This is a direct violation of US citizens 4th Amendment Constitutional right to privacy within the home.”
Industry’s Own Words: 6 Admissions Of In-Home Surveillance Using Smart Meters
http://www.takebackyourpower.net/news/2014/04/16/industrys-own-words-6-admissions-of-in-home-surveillance-using-smart-meters/
Thanks
The more info we have, the better.
EW: Abolish the FISA Court?
This latest recommendation by Marcy Wheeler to abolish the FISA Court as a more effective reform than Senator Leahy’s bill is something I’ve wondered about over the last few years. She makes the case here:
http://www.emptywheel.net/2014/08/07/a-better-reform-than-usa-freedom-get-rid-of-the-fisa-court/
Excerpt from her post:
Given Deputy Attorney General James Coles’ confirmation of Zoe Lofgren and Mark Warner’s questions about what Section 215 may be used for — including credit card data, URL searches, and location data — this morphing use of 215 now likely provides the government access programmatically to things they previously needed individualized warrants for.
Even with the opinions and applications we’ve seen — most of which pre-date the significant 2010 expansion of 215-based programs — it becomes clear the FISC judges (or at least those in DC who review the more novel applications) have become a rubber stamp for programs that far surpass the language of the law and likely conflict with other laws. With the vast expansion of dragnets starting in 2004, the FISC has become a court of reasonableness generally, not reasonableness within the letter of the law as written by Congress. The series of plaintive and laughably weak FISC opinions since the exposure of the Section 215 program underscores this: exposed as having far exceeded the law and intent of the Section 215 program, the FISC was left trying to invent the law post hoc.
Bates has, even more than his earlier letter, made it clear that he, at least, believes the FISC is and should be a partner with the Executive, providing legal cover for novel new surveillance that may not fit the intent of Congress. I’d say, too, that even in the area of individualized warrants, it has presided over the redefinition of things like “agent of foreign power,” such that confused Muslim young men become legitimate targets for invasive surveillance that can never be checked in the context of criminal proceedings.
So let’s get rid of it!
It may be the case that in 1978 traditional Title III courts couldn’t handle the secrecy required by FISC proceedings. But they can and do now, routinely. There’s no reason judges throughout the country couldn’t be asked to weigh FISC probable cause as they currently weigh criminal probable cause; and having more judges do so might stay closer to the definition of foreign power as intended by Congress, and if it doesn’t (which given the rubber stamp of magistrates, might well happen), it would be more likely to be reviewed at the appellate level.
Similarly, the courts have and are proving able to deal with new applications, as their treatment of FBI’s request for nationwide warrants to hack makes clear. But they do so in deliberative fashion, actual weighing the language of the law, rather than just secretly approving an application that pretty clearly violates Congress’ intent.
Eliminating the FISC wouldn’t fix all the problems of out-of-control surveillance. Requiring notice for EO 12333 collection is another necessary step, as is actual prosecution for violations of surveillance law. But it seems that just eliminating the FISC would be a far better fix for the problems exposed by Snowden’s leaking than USA Freedom would be.
Unacceptable
What!? The government is spying on its own citizens?? I didn’t know that!
Oh wait…yes I did, thanks to Edward Snowden who detailed the extent of the spying and then has to escape to Russia, of all places, to avoid prosecution by the US.
I find it unacceptable that some of our government officials can boldly admit that “This is a debate about Americans’ fundamental relationship with their government – about whether our government should have the power to create massive databases of information about its citizens” and then be silent about Snowden.
While I’m tempted to commend Mr. Leahy for introducing the USA FREEDOM Act of 2014, it falls far short of solving the real problem which is the violation of the Fourth Amendment which reads…“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Now that the big cat is out of the bag and pretty much anyone paying attention has documented proof of what is going on, (thanks to Mr. Snowden), Mr. Leahy and the politicians listed in the above article (mostly with D’s next to their names) come out in support of a bill that appears to correct the very things Mr. Snowden has risked his career and life to expose. Yet still there is no mention of exonerating Mr. Snowden.
The USA FREEDOM Act of 2014 is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt by our Senate representatives in Washington to cover their butts after they voted in favor of the USA PATRIOT act which they knew violated the intent of the Fourth Amendment. Meanwhile, Mr. Snowden has to hide out in crappy Moscow wondering whether he’ll ever be able to return to the US without fear of prosecuton or worse.
More on inadequacies of USA Freedom Act
Blogger Marcy Wheeler continues her yeoman service by going through all recently released documents on the ‘Internet dragnet” page by page, commenting on new info, discrepancies with public record, inconsistencies, etc in a series of working threads posted to her blog: http://www.emptywheel.net/
Just so this issue doesn’t get completely buried by all the ‘news’, here’s an excerpt from her most recent post on Senator Leahy’s bill:
USA Freedom Must Explicitly Require NSA and CIA to Comply with Law’s Minimization Procedures
I know I’ve had a lot of mostly unenthusiastic things to say about even Pat Leahy’s version of the USA Freedom Act.
Having read about half of last week’s Internet Dragnet document dump
so far, I’m increasingly worried about two details I’ve already raised.
<snip>