House Votes Down Warrant Requirements for FBI Access to Americans’ Data
A divisive US law that sparked an uncommon alliance between progressive Democrats and pro-Trump Republicans last autumn—both equally concerned about the FBI’s targeting of activists, journalists, and politicians—was recently reauthorized. However, in a significant win for the Biden administration, House members rejected an amendment earlier that day that would have imposed new warrant requirements on federal agencies accessing Americans’ data under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
“Many members who tanked this vote have long histories of voting for this specific privacy protection, including former speaker Pelosi, Representative Lieu, and Representative Neguse.”
According to Sean Vitka, policy director at the civil-liberties-focused nonprofit Demand Progress, numerous members who voted against the amendment have consistently supported this particular privacy safeguard in the past.
Jurisdiction Challenges and Data Searches
The House Judiciary Committee, whose long-standing jurisdiction over FISA has been contested by supporters of the intelligence community, had previously passed the warrant amendment earlier this year. A Brennan Center analysis this week revealed that intelligence committee members authored 80 percent of the base text of the FISA reauthorization bill.
“Three million Americans’ data was searched in this database of information. The FBI wasn’t even following its own rules when they conducted those searches. That’s why we need a warrant.”
Representative Jim Jordan, chair of the House Judiciary Committee, emphasized the need for a warrant, citing the FBI’s failure to adhere to its own guidelines when conducting searches on the data of three million Americans.
National Security Concerns and Internal Policies
Representative Mike Turner, chair of the House Intelligence Committee, alongside top spy agency officials, campaigned for months to defeat the warrant amendment. They argued that requiring warrants would delay the bureau and hinder national security investigations, maintaining that no further approval should be necessary to examine the legally collected communications already in the government’s possession.
Turner and Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, released a joint statement following the vote, asserting that Section 702 remains one of the nation’s most effective national security tools, enabling the United States to counter adversaries, prevent potential terrorist attacks, and disrupt international drug cartels smuggling fentanyl into the country.
The FBI introduced new internal policies to curb abuse, changes the Biden administration deems sufficient to prevent future misuse. These policies include requiring analysts to seek approval from higher-ups and consult with a government attorney when conducting batch queries targeting Americans’ communications.
Calls for Reform and Geolocation Data Concerns
Privacy advocates argue that relying on the FBI’s internal policing against its own constitutional violations has failed in the past and that the bureau can no longer be trusted to refrain from spying on Americans without cause. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) urges the Senate to add a warrant requirement and curb the government’s unchecked surveillance.
Judiciary members also sought to include an amendment prohibiting the government from purchasing Americans’ geolocation data from private companies, which House speaker Mike Johnson killed earlier in the week at Turner’s request. The US Supreme Court has recognized geolocation data as protected by the “probable cause” standard, but the government has circumvented this ruling by buying GPS data from companies that consumers believe are tracking them solely for advertising purposes.
“They’re buying data. That’s what they’re doing. They’re structuring markets to collect the data and they’re circumventing the Fourth Amendment. We need to turn that off.”
Representative Warren Davidson, a Republican from Ohio, criticized the government’s practice of purchasing data and structuring markets to collect it, effectively bypassing the Fourth Amendment’s protections.
5 Comments
Ah, so it’s more like “Spy on us freely, but make it official,” huh, Isabella Cruz?
Big Brother really stepped up his game, didn’t he?
Well, guess it’s time to wrap our conversations in coded language, huh?
Doesn’t this just feel like 1984 is becoming less fiction and more a user manual every day?
Oh, they’re just making sure they don’t miss any of our riveting group chats, right?