Intelligence leaders are lobbying Congress to keep a controversial surveillance law in place despite concerns it has been used to spy on American citizens.
Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) allows U.S. intelligence agencies to collect broad swathes of data including texts, emails, and phone calls from foreigners living outside of the United States.
The law also allows intelligence agencies to collect “incidental” information on American citizens whenever an American interacts with a foreigner under surveillance and has their communications incidentally spied upon as well.
Detractors say that the law effectively grants intelligence agencies a means of circumventing the Constitution, while proponents say the law is necessary to stop time-sensitive terror threats.
Speaking to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on March 11, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines said that the mechanism was invaluable to the interagency apparatus.
“The intelligence gathered pursuant to Section 702 was essential in preparing this annual threat assessment and is absolutely fundamental to every aspect of our work, as I know you know,” Ms. Haines told the committee.
“It does so at a speed and reliability that we simply cannot replace without any other authority.”
Ms. Haines added that Section 702 provided intelligence agencies with “unique insights” and that too much regulation would hurt the “agility” required to respond to emergent threats.
Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) also argued in favor of the bill while acknowledging past “overzealous use at the FBI.”
For his part, Mr. Warner said that the intelligence provided through 702 surveillance was too good to let go of and that some regulation should be added, but the law should otherwise be kept in place.
“Congress needs to act,” Mr. Warner said. “60 percent of all the information that goes into the president’s daily brief is derived from 702 information.”
One such regulation that has been touted in recent months is ensuring that intelligence agencies obtain a warrant to view Americans’ data when obtained through Section 702.
FBI director Christopher Wray balked at the idea of being required to obtain a warrant, however.
“A warrant requirement for us to run U.S. person queries would be untenable and would largely gut the effectiveness of the authority,” Mr. Wray said.
“I would implore Congress not to take that additional step.”
The issue of warrants and Americans’ Constitutional right to avoid unreasonable searches and seizures has been a hot-button issue in recent months, particularly given intelligence agencies purchasing of bulk data, including private information from Americans.
U.S. intelligence agencies currently turn to data brokers, who scoop up bulk data both legally and illegally to sell it for profit in order to obtain new intelligence.
A process Ms. Haines referred to as “increasingly critical to the intelligence community’s work.”
Letters released by Sen. Ron Wyden earlier in the year documented that the Department of Defense (DoD), for example, has effectively circumvented Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights by using commercial means to obtain private information without the warrants that would be required to obtain such data from service providers.
Mr. Wyden, who is a member of the committee, said on Monday that there appeared to be no rules at all when it came to governing how intelligence agencies purchased American citizens’ data.
“It is the Wild West out there in terms of sensitive information on Americans, and the government can buy it up,” Mr. Wyden said.
“Unlike normal intelligence collection, there are apparently no rules here.”
