Slashdot Mirror


Congress Is About To Vote On Expanding the Warrantless Surveillance of Americans (vice.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: On Tuesday afternoon, a handful of U.S. Representatives will convene to review an amendment that would reauthorize warrantless foreign surveillance and expand the law so that it could include American citizens. It would, in effect, legalize a surveillance practice abandoned by the NSA in 2017 in order to appease the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which found the NSA to have abused its collection capacity several times. If it passes Tuesday's review, the bill may be voted on by the U.S. House of Representatives as early as Thursday. Drafted by the House Intelligence Committee last December, the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act of 2017 is an amendment to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). It is one of six different FISA-related bills under consideration by Congress at the moment, but by far the most damaging to the privacy rights of American citizens.

FISA was enacted in 1978, but Section 702, referred to by former FBI Director James Comey as the "crown jewels of the intelligence community," wasn't added until 2008. This section allows intelligence agencies to surveil any foreigner outside the U.S. without a warrant that the agency considers a target. The problem is that this often resulted in the warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens as well due to two loopholes known as "backdoor searches" and "about collection." Backdoor search refers to a roundabout way of monitoring Americans' communications. Since intelligence agencies are able to designate any foreigner's communications as a target for surveillance, if this foreigner has communicated with an American this means this American's communications are then also considered fair game for surveillance by the agency.

8 of 226 comments (clear)

  1. Making America Great Again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The government absolutely needs to the legal ability to keep the 99% under constant surveillance in order to ensure that they don't rise up against the 1%, after all.

  2. ToiletPaper by sdinfoserv · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "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."
    Stupid little thing called the 4th Amendment... Any conflicts?

    1. Re: ToiletPaper by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, "home of the brave" went out the window a long time ago when the US allowed "but terrrrist" to be a catch-all argument whenever something was to be done that eliminated another liberty, why bother clinging to that other part of the last line of the anthem?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. Power to abuse, not to do their jobs by DeplorableCodeMonkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I used to work with a few Syrian expatriates who were nominally Muslim. They were shocked at the level of Saudi influence in the mosques in our region and had to really bounce around to find one that was not on the take. That's their word, not mine. They could not believe that we'd spend so much time and money on "surveillance," but allow what would be the equivalent of open KGB recruitment (as in uniformed Soviet officers at career fairs) on college campuses during the Cold War.

    I have a much simpler and less constitutionally dangerous solution:

    1. Pass a law forbidding the funding of any domestic organization by a foreign government except the Vatican.
    2. Authorize the use the corporate death penalty and full asset forfeiture for any organization convicted of intentionally accepting that funding.
    3. Pass a law that amends immigration law to provide for the banishment of any foreigner who is convicted of espionage or sedition.
    4. Prosecute all extremist preachers (like Wahabis and Salafists) under the Sedition Act.
    5. Pass a law providing the courts with the discretionary power to remove the citizenship of any foreign-born person who is convicted of sedition or espionage

    1. Re:Power to abuse, not to do their jobs by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1. Why exempt the Vatican?
      2. Careful, I could easily construct a way to get rid of political rivals that way.
      3. No complaints here, as long as we find ways to ensure that this isn't abused to get rid of "inconvenient" people.
      4. Does that include the Westboro Baptist Church?
      5. See 3. Also, where do you want to put such a person, most likely there is no original state to shove him into.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. 2008? Oh, the DEMOCRAT Senate and House? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    In 2008, DEMOCRATS controlled both the House and the Senate.

    Hey, they had to lay the groundwork for a surveillance regime to use against Trump.

    Why else would we need the FBI to use a bogus "dossier" to get a FISA warrant against Trump's campaign and then have UN Ambassador Susan Rice unmask all of them?

    And then feed all that to Robert Mueller?

  5. Driving the use of encryption. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think it's hilarious that they don't realize that it's their own insatiable desire to spy on everyone that is the primary driving force behind the spread of encrypted communications. That they don't realize this truth makes it all the more funny.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  6. Re:*STOP BLAMING TRUMP* ! by bobbied · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The buck stops with my predecessor."

    At this point.... Yes, it does....

    Once the bill shows up on the Donald's desk, THEN the buck stops with him, but not before.

    How about it boys and girls of the democrat caucus? You going to let this out of the Senate? I believe you can easily stop it from gaining cloture by just voting as a block. What are you going to do?

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101