• On TechRepublic: Five super-secret features in Windows 7
January 15, 2009 11:19 AM PST

Secret court: Warrantless NSA wiretapping fine

by Declan McCullagh
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 9 comments

A secret federal appeals court has ruled that federal agencies can be authorized to conduct warrantless e-mail and telephone surveillance without violating the U.S. Constitution.

In a 29-page redacted opinion (PDF) released Thursday, the court ruled that presidents do not need to obtain warrants to conduct "foreign intelligence for national-security purposes"--which is effectively at least a partial endorsement of President Bush's views on expansive executive powers.

The central question in this case was how the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on "unreasonable searches and seizures" applies to intelligence agencies wishing to compel AT&T and other providers to open their networks to federal snoops hoping to listen in on international communications.

The U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review concluded that as long as the executive branch has "several layers of serviceable safeguards to protect individuals against unwarranted harms and to minimize incidental intrusions, its efforts to protect national security should not be frustrated by the courts."

The case arose because an unnamed telecommunications company believed that a now-lapsed surveillance law was unconstitutional and challenged it in the secret court.

Also on Thursday, Attorney General-designate Eric Holder was answering questions about warrantless wiretapping during his Senate confirmation hearing. Holder indicated that he would seek curbs on such National Security Agency programs.

Orders of the secret appeals court, which meets behind closed doors, are a rarity. (An earlier opinion, also siding with the Bush administration, was released in November 2002. The original classified, unredacted version of Thursday's opinion was finished in August 2008.)

That's because the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court typically hears only from one side--lawyers from the U.S. Department of Justice--and appeals happen only when the requests are denied. More than two decades went by without any appeals taking place.

The FISC appeals court's ruling is more important for what it says about its view of the Fourth Amendment than what it says about the particular statute in question, the Protect America Act.

The August 2007 law expanded the Foreign Intelligence Information Act and allowed warrantless eavesdropping on people "reasonably believed" to be outside the United States. It permitted the attorney general and the director of national intelligence to issue directives--valid for one year--to force communications providers to open their networks for that purpose.

By February 16, 2008, the Protect America Act had sunset, and was eventually repealed and revised in July 2008. But the directives issued during that time were still in effect, which led to the court challenge.

The Justice Department on Thursday said it "is pleased with this important ruling by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, which upholds the constitutionality of foreign intelligence surveillance conducted under the Protect America Act of 2007."

Declan McCullagh, CNET News' chief political correspondent, chronicles the intersection of politics and technology. He has covered politics, technology, and Washington, D.C., for more than a decade, which has turned him into an iconoclast and a skeptic of anyone who says, "We oughta have a new federal law against this." E-mail Declan.
advertisement
 
Business supplies and services can get expensive. Get smart spending tips and learn about new cost-saving opportunities for your business
Recent posts from Politics and Law
Confidential 9/11 pager messages disclosed
IBM staffer posts pics on Facebook, loses benefits
Congress may probe leaked global warming e-mails
Spain mandates affordable broadband for all
Town to photograph every car that enters and leaves
Dot-com thinking for D.C.: Expert Labs debuts
FCC discusses barriers to national broadband plan
What Intel just bought for $1.25 billion: Less risk
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (9 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by unknown unknown January 15, 2009 12:16 PM PST
This isn't surprising considering the FISA court is just a rubber stamp organization.
Reply to this comment
by larrysing January 15, 2009 12:57 PM PST
About time !!! I always knew all the croaking about "they are taking our FREEDOM AWAY by trying to protect us !!" was a completely bogus argument.

The key phrase:

"several layers of serviceable safeguards to protect individuals against unwarranted harms and to minimize incidental intrusions, its efforts to protect national security should not be frustrated by the courts."

So they don't care if overhear you having an affair on your secret red mistress phone.

They are JUST looking for the BAD GUYS. If you're not one of them, then you shouldn't give a darn about who's listening in on your calls.
Reply to this comment
by dcase99 January 15, 2009 1:23 PM PST
This is wrong on so many levels.

If you thing your arguement is correct then how did the NSA record a US Military solider in IRAQ having phone sex with his wife? Oh and not to mention, posted it on the Internet.

If you think the powers that be can't just spy on you because they feel like it today, you are sadly mistaken.
by fidomccokefiend January 15, 2009 2:25 PM PST
You are kidding, right? You are truly that scared of the boogeyman that you believe a government with this type of power will NEVER abuse it? Really? Seriously, you need learn more about history then.

Papers, please.
by Draq Wraith January 15, 2009 3:56 PM PST
Well if thats how you feel then just take those drapes down remove the locks on your doors, you can trust the government to keep you safe.

Wait until you been victimized by this law and you will see how from our point of view.
Want to arrange a protest? good luck not having the cops show up at it in full riot gear suppressing your rights to protest.

Want to write a story anonymously like mark twain did good luck the FBI will be in your stuff in no time.
I find this secret court violates the US constitution right to citizens common law review of the evidence and challenge of this interpretation of the law. It is not Us the government allows it is we the people!
by rashinal January 15, 2009 8:24 PM PST
Why is this a surprise ? These guys are a bunch of bushies , intent on justifying bush's illegal actions after the fact, and hoping to forward his perverted legacy into the future.
There should be NO ambiguity on this, the founders were as clear as a bell and put it in the simplest of terms.
That these guys can even "debate" it is an indication of just how twisted and evil they are.
Reply to this comment
by scdecade January 16, 2009 5:41 AM PST
So the Supreme Court rules that evidence collected illegally can be used in a criminal case and the (secret!) FISA court rules that spying without probable cause is acceptable. Um, does anybody see a moral hazard developing? Haha - "We the people" haven't got any rights left. The saddest part is the government employees who are our new slave masters are a bunch of puny men with burned out rotten garbage in their heads. We've been conquered by bureaucratic imbeciles under the pretense of "saving" us from weak, desperate, seekers of revenge for the injustices of US foreign policy, i.e. "terrorists." This country has been flushed down the toilet by the worst breed of selfish government con artist narcissists. These people have NO RIGHT to spy on anybody without probably cause and a court issued search warrant which specifies what they're allowed to look for. They can pass whatever BS "laws" or "rulings" they want to. But it doesn't legitimize their actions morally.

Prosperity will not return to the US until these leeches are salted.
Reply to this comment
by January 16, 2009 8:32 PM PST
"how did the NSA record a US Military solider in IRAQ having phone sex with his wife? Oh and not to mention, posted it on the Internet. "
Um...because there are people who are criminals and want to discredit the administration even if they have to break the law to do it? Seriously--how do you possibly think that the people looking for terrorists are interested in posting phone sex on the internet?
Reply to this comment
by scdecade January 17, 2009 5:38 AM PST
See?!? Our tax dollars are even wasted on Big Brother paid pumpers. Do you honestly think the post to which this one replies to was posted by a real person? The government pays stooges to lull the people into submission by posting on social media. This is a well known fact that's been reported on widely. Nobody in their right mind believes spying without probable cause is a good thing. So this post follows the classic government trick. Always, always, always notice the reference to an unnamed threat. Implied danger is their number one tool. It does dawn on them that they themselves are the real danger; however, they won't allow themselves to see an alternative. That alternative is yours and my freedom, privacy, peace, and liberty.
(9 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

The browser battles go on and on

roundup From Firefox to IE and from Chrome to Opera and Safari, there's no sitting still for browser makers looking to keep their products fresh and competitive.

3G wireless still holds promise

The next generation of 4G wireless may get all the headlines, but advanced 3G technology will likely dominate services for the next few years.

About Politics and Law

News at the intersection of technology, politics, and law, ranging from intellectual property to censorship to tech policy.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Politics and Law topics

advertisement
Click Here
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right