Christopher Wray is going totally spastic over the possibility he could lose his beloved warrantless search authority. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act isn’t popular with conservatives. Centrist Democrats don’t like it much either. While both extremes of rubber stamping it as it stands and ditching it altogether are equally unlikely, there’s a good chance that Feds will need to ask for a warrant from here on out. Wray’s last ditch effort was to send his staffers scrambling to leak to the press. They cherry picked some cases they couldn’t have cracked if they had to get a warrant first.
Secret search controversy
Hardcore Freedom Caucus members are insisting that “a warrant requirement” has to be added for clandestine search queries. The House will be focusing their attention on the re-authorization of FISA Section 702, which lets the feds spy on U.S. citizens with contacts outside the country.
Big brother would have much better chances of keeping that provision out if the feds hadn’t been caught weaponizing the system to illegally frame Donald Trump and his political associates.
“At the end of the day, we’ve got to make sure that our government can’t keep spying on us citizens without a warrant,” Virginia lawmaker Bob Good insists. They were using the classified database like Google search.
Reauthorizing FISA should NOT be done in a secretive manner.
And Members should NOT be fearmongered into expanding FISA spying authority.
Congress works for the American people—not the intel community. pic.twitter.com/QRNqTQKU0U
— Rep. Andrew Clyde (@Rep_Clyde) February 14, 2024
“Simply put, anonymous bureaucrats have abused this tool that was intended for supporting surveillance of threats to spy on American citizens.”
The feds weren’t simply spying on Donald Trump without a legal search warrant, they used the provision against anyone they didn’t like including COVID denying doctors and independent journalists.
The entire provision was supposed to fade into the sunset long ago but Democrat efforts have kept it alive. Time and again it’s come up for a review and extended a few more months without major changes.
Two competing solutions
The House Intelligence Committee has been working on one package and the Judiciary Committee on another. They’re having a hard time making them match. Right now, the intelligence panel’s version seems to be gaining the most traction.
That bill “includes numerous reforms for the FBI, the agency found to have most frequently improperly queried the 702 database, but does not include a warrant requirement.” Instead of requiring a warrant, it “severely limits the number of FBI personnel who can approve an agent’s search.”
That’s not going to make it all the way through. The general consensus is to adopt a generic version, then doctor it up with à la carte amendments. A warrant requirement is expected to be top of the list.
Update: Our government invades Americans’ privacy without a warrant, using the FISA 702 program.
That’s unconstitutional.
Thursday, we will have a recorded vote on an amendment to reform this program so the feds will have to get a warrant to search US citizens’ communications. pic.twitter.com/9i2YC01ZoP
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) February 14, 2024
Staffers have Politico convinced that the Federal Bureau of Instigation would be handcuffed into impotence if they had to get a search warrant, even from a secret court. That’s a load of crap, Arizona’s Andy Biggs declares.
“The narrative from some on the other side is if you have warrants, if you require a warrant for a query, you will kill law enforcement and you will be responsible for dastardly deeds.”
He’s already on the record suggesting all sorts of exceptions for when the feds can get an emergency search in without a warrant. You can expect a heated battle over the subject, that’s for sure.
