House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Dec. 12 said that a controversial spying authority “must be dramatically reformed,” but failed to take sides in an ongoing dispute over the matter between two powerful House committees.
The authority in question, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), is designed to allow U.S. intelligence officials to gather information on foreign agents working outside the United States.
While the original legislation passed in 1978 was designed to safeguard American civil liberties from abuses of spying powers, a 2008 amendment to the bill, including Section 702, significantly expanded its scope. Under the rules laid out in Section 702, intel officials can seek to “unmask” information about Americans inside the United States who had contact with targeted foreign individuals.
However this program, among the government secrets revealed by Edward Snowden in 2014, has itself been at the center of several high-profile cases of abuse.
Now, it’s set to expire in a matter of days, on Dec. 31, unless Congress reauthorizes it. But lawmakers are far from united on how to do this.
A bill proposed by the House Judiciary Committee and sponsored by Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) would reauthorize Section 702 while instituting a nearly across-the-board requirement for warrants to query American citizens’ data. Mr. Biggs’s bill provides limited exceptions for emergencies, but seeks to prevent abuses of these emergency powers by imposing civil and criminal penalties for violations.
A competing bill proposed by the House Intelligence Committee and sponsored by Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) would not impose the same warrant requirements as Mr. Biggs’s bill.
This issue—whether or not to require warrants—marks the key distinction between the two proposals.
Mr. Johnson has demurred from taking sides on the issue or stating clearly whether he supports Mr. Biggs’s bill or Mr. Turner’s.
Initially, the two bills were set to be pitted against each other after markup in the House Rules Committee on Dec. 11. But with little explanation provided, both were pulled from consideration midway through the hearing.
Instead, lawmakers are expected to authorize a roughly four month extension of the program as they continue to hash out the specifics of what a proper Section 702 reauthorization should look like.
During a Dec. 12 press conference, Mr. Johnson spoke at length on the issue, emphasizing the need for reforms but making no comment on the broader dispute over the warrants issue.
“FISA is a very important piece of legislation and Section 702, which would expire at the end of the year, is a really, really important provision because it protects us on the homeland,” he said. “It protects us from terrorist attacks. It’s the tool we use to uncover those plots when they’re being planned, and it’s been very, very effective in that measure.
Abuses
Mr. Johnson referenced abuses of the program, saying that he agreed with others that Section 702 needed significant changes.“What we all also agree on is that it must be dramatically reformed because it’s been abused 287,000 times,” Mr. Johnson said, referencing a recent court report that revealed the number of times the FBI had illegally queried the Section 702-acquired data of American citizens.
Referencing these reported abuses, Mr. Johnson said, “Between 2020 and 2021, the FBI did queries on American citizens in violation of that law and our basic civil liberties.
“We have this very important matter to determine and resolve, and you have lots of different opinions on where that is,” he said, referencing the competing Section 702 reform proposals.
Mr. Johnson also indicated that the two proposals were pulled from Rules Committee mark-up to give lawmakers more time to hash out the issue.
Currently, the plan is to include a four-month extension of the program as it currently exists in the must-pass military funding bill, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)—a move that has raised controversy from within his conference.
Mr. Johnson argued that this extension is meant to allow lawmakers time to deal with the matter, as the measure currently will expire at the end of this calendar year.
“We’re working toward consensus, but this is a very, very serious matter,” Mr. Johnson said. “This isn’t some minor policy in our law, this is about keeping Americans safe.
“I am not one who wants to rush this. I don’t think we can make a mistake in this. We’ve got to do it right, and so we’re gonna allow the time to do that,” he said
The extension in the NDAA, Mr. Johnson said, would allow lawmakers “the time to work not only in our own chamber, but with the other chamber as well, and come forward with a compromise provision that will not only keep us safe but will also safeguard our civil liberties.
“Both of those objectives must be achieved and that’s why it’s taking a long time. Democracy is messy sometimes, but we have to get it right.”
Some in Mr. Johnson’s conference aren’t enthusiastic about this plan, however.
Mr. Biggs told The Epoch Times he opposes the move.
“FISA 702 reform legislation cannot be crammed into the 2024 NDAA spending bill monstrosity,“ Mr. Biggs said. ”There are rampant, flagrant surveillance abuses within the FISA 702 spying authority that require it to be its own standalone bill. We should allow opportunities for open debate, amendments and reform instead of rubber-stamping a flawed authority.”
Still, with only days left until lawmakers go home for the holidays, an NDAA extension seems like the most likely outcome unless opponents can garner substantial support.
