Conservatives and progressives in Congress unite against surveillance program extension
An Unlikely Alliance Emerges in Congress Over FISA Extension
A battle is brewing in Congress over the extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and it’s bringing together an unexpected coalition of conservative Republicans and progressive Democrats. Section 702 of FISA, enacted in 2008, has been a point of contention as it grants extensive powers to U.S. intelligence agencies to collect foreign data without a court order, supposedly to combat terrorism and espionage. However, lawmakers argue that this measure infringes on the privacy of American citizens whose data inevitably gets caught up in the surveillance.
Leading the charge against renewing Section 702 are Reps. Warren Davidson (R-OH), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), and Pramila Jayapal (D-WA). In a joint letter addressed to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), they expressed their objection to combining the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with a temporary extension of FISA. They argue that the privacy of Americans should be a top priority for the government and that unchecked, warrantless surveillance must be addressed.
Protecting Americans’ Fourth Amendment Rights
“The privacy of Americans should be of the utmost importance to our government, and yet, we have seen too many examples of unchecked, warrantless surveillance of Americans,” said Jayapal, chairwoman of the House Progressive Caucus. “An overhaul is necessary to protect Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights and their sensitive, personal data. Section 702 reauthorization should be subject to strong scrutiny and debate and cannot be included in larger, must-pass legislation. Congress must work to stop the government from warrantlessly spying on Americans.”
Safeguarding the Fourth Amendment
Biggs, a member of the House Freedom Caucus, echoed these concerns, stating, “The intelligence community is attacking our Fourth Amendment privacy rights. Rogue actors continue to abuse FISA Section 702 to improperly spy on American citizens, and it is far past time for the practice to come to an end. The Fourth Amendment guarantees Americans a reasonable expectation of privacy, and the government should never be given the opportunity to skirt the supreme Law of the Land. Reauthorization of this spying authority cannot be tied to a massive piece of ‘must-pass’ legislation like the NDAA. This would be an affront to the American people—who have voiced their strong disapproval of Section 702—and to the integrity of the legislative process.”
Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), chairman of the Freedom Caucus, also expressed concerns about the potential inclusion of FISA in the NDAA. He emphasized the need for reforms and cautioned against using the fear of national security to pass unrelated legislation.
A Stand-Alone Extension for Negotiating Reforms
“They want to use clean FISA, which I oppose,” Roy said. “But a 30- to 60-day extension of FISA while we negotiate reforms [is] not the end of the world if it’s stand-alone, right? Because then it’s kind of staying on its own merit. I can vote no, maybe it passes. But if you take FISA and you add it to the NDAA, and we know that the NDAA is going to be stripped of our fixes on our side on abortion tourism, transgender surgeries, DEI, critical race theory … you’re using the fear of the security of this country under FISA collection of data, and you’re using that extension to pass a crap NDAA bill,” Roy added.
Can the unlikely alliance between conservatives and progressives overcome party politics and effectively challenge the powerful intelligence agencies that support FISA’s provisions
T simply be tacked onto the NDAA without proper consideration.”
The unlikely alliance between conservative Republicans and progressive Democrats underscores the growing concern over government surveillance and the erosion of privacy rights. This issue transcends party lines and highlights the need for a comprehensive reform of FISA and its various provisions.
The sentiment shared by Davidson and his colleagues is not isolated. Many lawmakers, civil liberties organizations, and privacy advocates are also calling for a closer examination of FISA and a reevaluation of its impact on individual rights. The USA FREEDOM Act, which aimed to limit bulk data collection under FISA, received bipartisan support and was passed by Congress in 2015. However, critics argue that the reforms did not go far enough and that more substantial changes are required to protect privacy rights in the digital age.
One major concern with Section 702 is the incidental collection of Americans’ communications when targeting foreign individuals or entities. This “incidental collection” occurs when U.S. intelligence agencies intercept communications that happen to involve an American citizen, even if they are not the intended target. Critics argue that this violates the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. They emphasize the need for judicial oversight and individualized warrants to prevent the unwarranted invasion of privacy.
The unusual alliance of conservatives and progressives suggests a growing recognition that protecting Americans’ privacy transcends political ideology. However, it also raises questions about the potential obstacles in advancing meaningful FISA reform. Can these unlikely allies navigate the complex web of party politics and effectively challenge the powerful intelligence agencies that support FISA’s provisions?
The debate over FISA renewal is a pivotal moment for Congress to address the balance between national security and civil liberties. It is an opportunity to reevaluate the effectiveness and necessity of the surveillance tools granted under FISA. While concerns about terrorism and espionage are legitimate, they must not come at the expense of Americans’ constitutional rights. Vigorous debate, transparency, and a thorough examination of the consequences of unchecked surveillance are essential in ensuring that any extension or reform of FISA strikes the right balance.
As this unlikely alliance continues to rally against the extension of Section 702, it remains to be seen how their efforts will influence the broader debate. Will their coalition grow, attracting more members of Congress from both parties, or will party lines ultimately prevail? Regardless of the outcome, their collaboration signals a shifting dynamic within the political landscape and highlights the importance of safeguarding Americans’ privacy rights in an increasingly interconnected world.
The battle over the FISA extension is far from over, but the emergence of this unexpected alliance sends a clear message – Americans’ privacy should not be compromised in the name of national security. It is a reminder that bipartisan cooperation can arise even in the most unlikely circumstances when the fundamental rights of citizens are at stake.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
