Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) |
|
This article is out of date (actually, there's a secret article --- I just cant tell you about it).
© Cybertelecom ::
See also ECPA :: EmergenciesUS Govt surveillance conducted for a foreign intelligence purpose of US citizens and non citizens, domestically or abroad.
"When the govt conducts electronic surveillance to gather info for eventual use as evidence at a criminal proceeding, the govt actions are law enforcement and fall within the reach of title III. On the other hand, when the intent is to collect foreign intelligence or to prevent an action from occurring that would jeopardize national security, it is intelligence and FISA applies." Foreign governments includes groups engaged in international terrorism and foreign based organizations.History
Derived From: CRS 2003 p. 6
"When Congress passed Title III there was some question over the extent of the President’s inherent powers to authorize wiretaps – without judicial approval – in national security cases. As a consequence, the issue was simply removed from the Title III scheme.14 After the Court held that the President’s inherent powers were insufficient to excuse warrantless electronic eavesdropping on purely domestic threats to national security, United States v. United States District Court, 407 U.S. 297 (1972), Congress considered it prudent to augment the foreign intelligence gathering authority of the United States with the Foreign Intelligence Security Act of 1978, 92 Stat. 1783, 50 U.S.C. 1801 - 1811. The Act provides a procedure for judicial review and authorization or denial of wiretapping and other forms of electronic eavesdropping for purposes of foreign intelligence gathering. "
Derived From: 1985 ECPA Report p 20
"This act establishes legal standards and procedures for the use of electronic surveillance in collecting foreign intelligence and counter-intelligence within the United States. This was the first legislative authorization for foreign intelligence wiretapping and other forms of electronic surveillance. The scope of this act is broader than Title III. FISA defines electronic surveillance broadly to include four categories: 1) wiretaps, including not only voice communications but also teleprinter, telegraph, facsimile, and digital communications; 2) radio intercepts; 3) monitoring devices, which may include microphone eavesdropping, surreptitious closed circuit television (CCTV) monitoring, transmitters that track movements of vehicles, and other techniques; and 4) watch listing. However, the application of FISA protection in the latter three categories is limited to those circumstances in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a warrant would be required for law enforcement purposes. The act created the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, composed of seven Federal District Judges, to review and approve surveillance capable of monitoring U.S. persons (defined as U.S. citizens, lawfully admitted permanent resident aliens, and domestic organizations or corporations that are not openly acknowledged to be directed and controlled by foreign governments) in the United States. The procedural requirements of FISA apply only to electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes, but the criminal penalties appear to apply more broadly to include law enforcement surveillance.
Application:
Citizen: Must receive court order to intercept communications "If govt wishes to undertake electronic surveillance of US citizen or permanent resident alien for intelligence purposes, FISA requires the agent to obtain a court order first issued by the FISC. ... FISC proceedings are conducted in secrecy to protect national security interests. "in addition to securing a warrant from the FISC, a government agent seeking to conduct electronic surveillance of a US person must follow certain minimization procedures established by the attorney general." 50 U.S.C. § 1801.
Non Citizen: Surveillance up to one year without court order, attorney general must certify target is only foreign powers and that investigator will follow required minimization procedures. "The attorney general must submit a certification to this effect to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court butt this certification remains sealed unless the govt chooses to request a court order or the target of the surveillance challenges the legality of the surveillance. unlike title III surveillance targets, however, the subjects of FISA searches do not receive notice of the surveillance upon completion of the monitoring, so FISA targets may never learn that their privacy interests have been compromised. FISA allows surveillance conducted per attorney general cert (as opposed to court order) for up to one year. If govt wishes to conduct surveillance of foreign power for more than one year, the gov must apply for a FISC court order "
Application must include
"Statement of facts and circumstances to justify belief that: Target a foreign power or agent thereof; and each of the facilities at which surveillance directed is being used or about to be used by foreign power or agent thereof -"Statement of proposed minimization procedures
"Certification that significant purpose is to obtain foreign intelligence information
"Certification, and statement of basis therefore, that information cannot reasonably be obtained by normal investigative techniques."
Order Granted:
"To issue a warrant under FISA, a FISC judge must find probable cause to believe that the target of the electronic surveillance is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power. Since FISA imposes a lower probable cause threshold than Title III for issuance of a warrant, info obtained under FISC warrant for foreign intelligence purposes cannot be used for domestic law enforcement as a matter of constitutional law.... The USA Patriot Act however changes this standard and permits warrants to issue if "a significant purpose of the surveillance is to obtain foreign intelligence info. 50 U.S.C. § 1804(a)(7)(B).No notice unless communications introduced in criminal proceeding
Can also do pen register and trap and trace per FISA
Foreign intelligence gathering must be a "significant purpose" for the request for the FISA surveillance or physical search order, 50 U.S.C. 1804(a)(7)(B), 1823(a)(7)(B).
Appellate Review
US v. Wright, Dist. Court, D. Massachusetts 2016: ("Although some courts have noted that "FISA warrant applications are subject to `minimal scrutiny by the courts,' . . . upon . . . challenge," United States v. Abu-Jihaad, 630 F.3d 102, 130 (2d Cir. 2010) (quoting United States v. Duggan, 743 F.2d 59, 77 (2d Cir. 1984)), others have applied a heightened scrutiny — reviewing the FISA Court's probable cause determinations de novo, see, e.g., United States v. Turner, 840 F.3d 336, 340 (7th Cir. 2016); United States v. Rosen, 447 F. Supp. 2d 538, 545 (E.D. Va. 2006) . The reasoning for applying a more stringent standard is persuasive, "especially given that the review [of a FISA warrant application] is ex parte and thus unaided by the adversarial process." Rosen, 447 F. Supp. 2d at 545 (collecting Fourth Circuit precedents applying de novo review to FISA materials). The certifications in the FISA application(s), however, are presumed valid. See id.")
Law
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 ("FISA"), Pub.L. No. 95-511, 92 Stat. 1783 (1978) (codified as amended at 50 U.S.C. §§ 1801 et seq.
- Amended by USA PATRIOT ACT of 2001, Pub.L. No. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272 (2001)
- S. Rep. No, 98-660, “The Foreign Intelligence Surveil- lance Act of 1978: The First Five Years, ”
Caselaw
- Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA, 133 S. Ct. 1138, 1147 (2013)
- "In Clapper, the Supreme Court decided that human rights organizations did not have standing to challenge the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) because they could not show that their communications with suspected terrorists were intercepted by the government. The plaintiffs only suspected that such interceptions might have occurred. This, the Court held, was too speculative to support standing. In so ruling, however, it did not jettison the "substantial risk" standard. To the contrary, it stated that "[o]ur cases do not uniformly require plaintiffs to demonstrate that it is literally certain that the harms they identify will come about. In some instances, we have found standing based on a `substantial risk' that the harm will occur, which may prompt plaintiffs to reasonably incur costs to mitigate or avoid that harm." 133 S. Ct. at 1150 n.5 (2013) (citation omitted)."
- ACLU v. Clapper, 785 F.3d 787 (2nd Cir. 2015)
- ACLU V. Clapper - Challenge To Nsa Mass Call-Tracking Program, ACLU Cases (Oct. 29, 2015) ("In May 2015, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the call-records program violates Section 215 of the Patriot Act. Weeks later, on June 1, 2015, Section 215 briefly expired for the first time since the passage of the Patriot Act in 2001. The next day, Congress passed the USA Freedom Act, which amended Section 215 to prohibit the bulk collection of Americans’ call records.")
- NSA collecting phone records of millions of Verizon customers daily, The Guardian (June 6, 2013)
- United States v. Turner, 840 F.3d 336, 340 (7th Cir. 2016)
- United States v. Abu-Jihaad, 630 F.3d 102, 130 (2d Cir. 2010) (quoting United States v. Duggan, 743 F.2d 59, 77 (2d Cir. 1984)) "FISA warrant applications are subject to `minimal scrutiny by the courts,' . . . upon . . . challenge,"
- United States v. Rosen, 447 F. Supp. 2d 538, 545 (E.D. Va. 2006)
- United States v. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, 407 U.S. 297 (1972) "Court prohibited unauthorized electronic surveillance to gather intelligence for domestic security purposes, holding that: '. . . prior judicial approval is required for the type of domestic security surveillance involved in this case and that such approval may be made in accordance with such reasonable standards as the Congress may prescribe.'"
Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
Fed Reg: "The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board is an advisory body to assist the President and other senior Executive branch officials in ensuring that concerns with respect to privacy and civil liberties are appropriately considered in the implementation of all laws, regulations, and executive branch policies related to war against terrorism.
"Recommended by the July 22, 2004, report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board was established by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. It consists of five members appointed by and serving at the pleasure of the President. The Board is part of the White House Office within the Executive Office of the President and supported by an Executive Director and staff.
"The Board advises the President and other senior executive branch officials to ensure that concerns with respect to privacy and civil liberties are appropriately considered in the implementation of all laws, regulations, and executive branch policies related to efforts to protect the Nation against terrorism. This includes advising on whether adequate guidelines, supervision, and oversight exist to protect these important legal rights of all Americans. In addition, the Board is specifically charged with responsibility for reviewing the terrorism information sharing practices of executive branch departments and agencies to determine whether guidelines designed to appropriately protect privacy and civil liberties are being followed, including those issued by the President on December 16, 2005. In the course of performing these functions within the executive branch, the Board seeks the views of private sector, non-profit and academic institutions, Members of Congress, and all other interested parties and individuals on these issues.
- Closed Meeting June 19 This document Fed Reg notice. The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board will meet in closed session to discuss classified information pertaining to the PRISM-related activities and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Reports
- Admin. Office U.S. Courts, Wiretap Rep. 2015, Dec. 31, 2015 "[Nationwide] [n]o wiretap applications were reported as denied in 2015."
Papers
- Mystica M. Alexander & William P. Wiggins, A Domestic Consequence of the Government Spying on Its Citizens: The Guilty Go Free, 81 Brook. L. Rev. 627 (2016)
- Scott A. Boykin, The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Separation of Powers, 38 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 33 (2015)
- Maxwell Palmer, Does the Chief Justice Make Partisan Appointments to Special Courts and Panels?, 13 J. Empirical Legal Stud. 153 (2016)
- Karly Jo Dixon, Note, The Special Needs Doctrine, Terrorism, and Reasonableness, 21 Tex. J. C.L. & C.R. 35, 47-57 (2015)
- Charles Doyle, National Security Letters in Foreign Intelligence Investigations: A Glimpse of the Legal Background and Recent Amendments, Congressional Research Service (Sept. 8, 2009) Full Report
- Congressional Research Service, The USA Patriot Act: A Legal Analysis, p. 12 (April 15, 2002)
- Best, Intelligence and Law Enforcement: Countering Transnational Threats to the U.S., CRS REP.NO. RL30252 (Dec. 3, 2001).
News
- Dustin Volz, U.S. spy court rejected zero surveillance orders in 2015, Reuters News, May 2, 2016,
- ACLU vs DOJ on the implications of FISA Court ruling, Ars Technica 2/24/2009
- Judge Seeks Further Briefing on Constitutionality of Telecom Immunity, EFF 2/12/2009
- Secret FISA Court Approves Specific Application of Expired Law For Warrantless Wiretapping, EFF 1/15/2009
- EFF Challenges Telecom Immunity - Morning hearing highlights flaw in FISA Amendments Act, dslreports 12/2/2008
- Arlen Specter's festering FISA wound, Ars Technica 12/2/2008
- What Obama Can and Should Do to Stop Telecom Immunity, EFF 11/20/2008
- ACLU, EFF challenge constitutionality of FISA amendments, Ars Technica 10/21/2008
- AT&T Thanks Democrats For Telecom Immunity - In private party in Denver crashed by Salon.com., dslreports 8/28/2008
- FISA amendment forces appeals court to punt on wiretap case, Ars Technica 8/27/2008
- Three Ways to Fight Immunity, EFF 7/24/2008
- ACLU, others greet Bush FISA bill signing with new lawsuit, Ars Technica 7/14/2008
- FISA compromise passes with Obama, Clinton on opposite sides, Ars Technica 7/10/2008
- ACLU, others greets Bush FISA bill signing with new lawsuit, Ars Technica 7/10/2008
- U.S. Senate Passes Telecom Immunity Bill to Shield Phone Companies, CircleID 7/10/2008
- Discouraging Days for Those of Us who Still Believe this Country Should Live by the Rule of Law, Cook 7/10/2008
- FISA: AT&T, Verizon Lobbyists Win Again - The best government telco money can buy., dslreports 7/10/2008
- Senate Joins House in Caving to White House Immunity Demands, EFF 7/10/2008
- Help EFF Continue the Fight Against Warrantless Wiretapping, EFF 7/10/2008
- Senate Sells Out The Country: Approves Telco Immunity, Techdirt 7/10/2008
- The new FISA compromise: it's worse than you think, Ars Technica 7/8/2008
- The new FISA compromise: it's worse than you think, Ars Technica 7/8/2008
- U.S. Senate resumes debate on surveillance bill, CW 7/8/2008
- Obama Addresses FISA Immunity Critics - After they create largest social group on campaign website., dslreports 7/8/2008
- Senate Begins Final Debate on Retroactive Immunity, EFF 7/8/2008
- Bush Administration Admits That Telco Immunity More Important Than Increased Spying Power, Techdirt 7/8/2008
- Breaking News: Court Holds That FISA Preempts State Secret Privilege, EFF 7/3/2008
- Amnesty Foes 2.0: SenatorObama-PleaseVoteAgainstFISA, Peerflow 7/3/2008
- FISA Warrants vs. Criminal Warrants, Tech Liberation Front 7/3/2008
- Senate Delays Vote on Immunity, EFF 6/30/2008
- Senate Vote On Telco Immunity Pushed Back, Techdirt 6/30/2008
- Vote On Immunity Appears Imminent, But Anything Could Happen, EFF 6/26/2008
- Senators Dodd and Feingold Stand Strong Against Immunity, EFF 6/26/2008
- Obama weasels on FISA promise, Isen 6/24/2008
- Did Contributions Buy Telecom Immunity Votes in the House?, Tech Liberation Front 6/24/2008
- CDT Urges Congress to Reject FISA Amendment Legislation, CDT 6/20/2008
- Republican Senators: It's About Immunity, EFF 6/20/2008
- Congress Strikes Deal to Overhaul Wiretap Law, NYT 6/20/2008
- FISA, Susan Crawford 6/20/2008
- The Final FISA Sellout and My One Last Desperate Push for Sanity, Tales from the Sausage Factory 6/20/2008
- FISA Doesn't Expire, Tech Liberation Front 6/20/2008
- Our Congress Has Failed Us: Gives In On Telecom Immunity, Techdirt 6/20/2008
- Report: Deal to Stop Courts From Ruling on Illegal Warrantless Wiretaps Imminent, EFF 6/17/2008
- Senators Dodd and Feingold Criticize Bond's False FISA "Compromise", EFF 6/13/2008
- McCain Revises Stance on Warrantless Wiretapping Again, EFF 6/10/2008
- McCain tangled in flip-flop flap over wiretapping immunity, CNET 6/6/2008
- Spying Telecoms Receive Billions in Government Contracts, EFF 6/4/2008
- Congress Thinking About 'Compromise' That Would Move Telco Immunity Questions To Secret Court, Techdirt 6/3/2008
- Senators Question FBI About Unlawful Internet Archive Record Demand, EFF 5/15/2008
- Internet Archive Challenges F.B.I.'s Secret Records Demand, NYT 5/9/2008
- State v. Shirley Reid (Cape May County and Statewide) (NJ Sup Ct April 21 2008), NJ Sup Ct 4/29/2008
- FBI's Net surveillance proposal raises privacy, legal concerns, CNET 4/29/2008
- House Democrats Fight Telecom Wiretap Immunity - Propose new bill that gives telcos and privacy advocates their day in court, dslreports 3/13/2008
- House Democrats refuse to delete pending spy lawsuits, CNET 3/13/2008
- Plaintiffs Speak Out Against Telecom Immunity, EFF 3/7/2008
- Spy law battle may be settled this week, CNET 3/5/2008
- Five of Thousands: Requests FISA Court Rejected, Peerflow 3/5/2008
- Deal Close on Wiretap Law, a Top Democrat Tells CNN, NYT 3/3/2008
- AT&T Could Owe You $146,000 - FISA violation means $36,500 per claimant, per four years of wiretapping, dslreports 2/25/2008
- Senate Caves into Pressure - Won't Block Immunity for Illegal Spying, EFF 2/21/2008
- Surveillance Law Set to Expire Today, Wash Post 2/19/2008
- Lies, Damned Lies, and National Security, Tech Liberation Front 2/19/2008
- Court Turns Deaf Ear to ACLU Wiretapping Appeal, Ecommerce Times 2/19/2008
- House Democrats to Bush: No way on telecom immunity, CNET 2/15/2008
- FISA Nonsense, Tech Liberation Front 2/15/2008
- Quote of Note: John Conyers, Isen.blog 2/15/2008
- Cartoon Skewers Immunity, EFF 2/15/2008
- Olbermann On FISA, Tales from the Sausage Factory 2/15/2008
- Telecom Immunity Passes in Senate; Battle Lines Drawn for Conference Showdown, EFF 2/13/2008
- A Black Day For The Rule of Law, Tales from the Sausage Factory 2/13/2008
- House Committee Leaders Unite to Oppose Immunity for Telecoms, EFF 2/11/2008
- Telecom Immunity Passes in Senate; Battle Lines Drawn for Conference Showdown, EFF 2/13/2008
- A Black Day For The Rule of Law, Tales from the Sausage Factory 2/13/2008
- House Committee Leaders Unite to Oppose Immunity for Telecoms, EFF 2/11/2008
- FISA Immunity Vote -- Godknowswhen, Isen.blog 2/7/2008
- Another FISA Monday, Isen.blog 2/4/2008
- Congress extends surveillance law another 15 days, CW 2/1/2008
- Have The Senate Democrats Finally Learned?, Tales from the Sausage Factory 2/1/2008
- Victory! (battle not war), Isen.blog 1/29/2008
- Strong Majority of Voters Oppose Telecom Immunity, EFF 1/24/2008
- Cheney Pushes for Permanent Warrantless Wiretapping Power, Ecommerce Times 1/24/2008
- FISA and immunity, Susan Crawford 1/24/2008
- Search warrants not needed to monitor Internet use, court says, CW 7/10/2007
- FISA's Paperwork Burden, Tech Lib Front 8/29/2007
- Checks And Balances, We Hardly Knew Ye - Lawyer: FISA 'reform' the final nail in privacy casket..., DSLreports 8/9/2007
- Votes on New FISA Law Available, Tech Lib Front 8/9/2007
- Wiretap Ruling Threatens Telecoms, BWO 8/28/2006
- EFF Wins Preliminary Victory Over AT&T - Case Will Not Be Dismissed, Broadband Reports 7/21/2006
- EFF's Spying Case Moves Forward - Judge Denies Government's Motion to Dismiss AT&T Case, EFF 7/21/2006
- Judge Declines to Dismiss Lawsuit Against AT& T, Wash Post 7/21/2006
- Proposed Surveillance Bill Would Sweep NSA Spying Programs Under the Rug, EFF 7/14/2006
- FBI Proposes Major Net-Tapping Scheme, IP Democracy 7/10/2006
- AT&T, Group Challenge U.S. Spy Program, AP 4/14/2006