They also said that the new law for the first time provided
a legal framework for much of the surveillance without
warrants that was being conducted in secret by the National
Security Agency...
Original source URL:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/06/washington/06nsa.html
August 6, 2007
Bush Signs Law to Widen Legal Reach for Wiretapping
By JAMES RISEN
WASHINGTON, Aug. 5 ‹ President Bush signed into law on Sunday legislation that
broadly expanded the government¹s authority to eavesdrop on the international
telephone calls and e-mail messages of American citizens without warrants.
Congressional aides and others familiar with the details of the law said that
its impact went far beyond the small fixes that administration officials had
said were needed to gather information about foreign terrorists. They said
seemingly subtle changes in legislative language would sharply alter the legal
limits on the government¹s ability to monitor millions of phone calls and e-mail
messages going in and out of the United States.
They also said that the new law for the first time provided a legal framework
for much of the surveillance without warrants that was being conducted in secret
by the National Security Agency and outside the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act, the 1978 law that is supposed to regulate the way the
government can listen to the private communications of American citizens.
³This more or less legalizes the N.S.A. program,² said Kate Martin, director of
the Center for National Security Studies in Washington, who has studied the new
legislation.
Previously, the government needed search warrants approved by a special
intelligence court to eavesdrop on telephone conversations, e-mail messages and
other electronic communications between individuals inside the United States and
people overseas, if the government conducted the surveillance inside the United
States.
Today, most international telephone conversations to and from the United States
are conducted over fiber-optic cables, and the most efficient way for the
government to eavesdrop on them is to latch on to giant telecommunications
switches located in the United States.
By changing the legal definition of what is considered ³electronic
surveillance,² the new law allows the government to eavesdrop on those
conversations without warrants ‹ latching on to those giant switches ‹ as long
as the target of the government¹s surveillance is ³reasonably believed² to be
overseas.
For example, if a person in Indianapolis calls someone in London, the National
Security Agency can eavesdrop on that conversation without a warrant, as long as
the N.S.A.¹s target is the person in London.
Tony Fratto, a White House spokesman, said Sunday in an interview that the new
law went beyond fixing the foreign-to-foreign problem, potentially allowing the
government to listen to Americans calling overseas.
But he stressed that the objective of the new law is to give the government
greater flexibility in focusing on foreign suspects overseas, not to go after
Americans.
³It¹s foreign, that¹s the point,² Mr. Fratto said. ³What you want to make sure
is that you are getting the foreign target.²
The legislation to change the surveillance act was rushed through both the House
and Senate in the last days before the August recess began.
The White House¹s push for the change was driven in part by a still-classified
ruling earlier this year by the special intelligence court, which said the
government needed to seek court-approved warrants to monitor those international
calls going through American switches.
The new law, which is intended as a stopgap and expires in six months, also
represents a power shift in terms of the oversight and regulation of government
surveillance.
The new law gives the attorney general and the director of national intelligence
the power to approve the international surveillance, rather than the special
intelligence court. The court¹s only role will be to review and approve the
procedures used by the government in the surveillance after it has been
conducted. It will not scrutinize the cases of the individuals being monitored.
The law also gave the administration greater power to force telecommunications
companies to cooperate with such spying operations. The companies can now be
compelled to cooperate by orders from the attorney general and the director of
national intelligence.
Democratic Congressional aides said Sunday that some telecommunications company
officials had told Congressional leaders that they were unhappy with that
provision in the bill and might challenge the new law in court. The aides said
the telecommunications companies had told lawmakers that they would rather have
a court-approved warrant ordering them to comply.
In fact, pressure from the telecommunications companies on the Bush
administration has apparently played a major hidden role in the political battle
over the surveillance issue over the past few months.
In January, the administration placed the N.S.A.¹s warrantless wiretapping
program under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and subjected it for
the first time to the scrutiny of the FISA court.
Democratic Congressional aides said Sunday that they believed that pressure from
major telecommunications companies on the White House was a major factor in
persuading the Bush administration to do that. Those companies were facing major
lawsuits for having secretly cooperated with the warrantless wiretapping
program, and now wanted greater legal protections before cooperating further.
But the change suddenly swamped the court with an enormous volume of search
warrant applications, leading, in turn, to the administration¹s decision to seek
the new legislation.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
--
--------------------------------------------------------
Posting archives: http://cyberjournal.org/show_archives/?lists=newslog
Escaping the Matrix website: http://escapingthematrix.org/
cyberjournal website: http://cyberjournal.org
Community Democracy Framework:
http://cyberjournal.org/DemocracyFramework.html
Moderator: •••@••.••• (comments welcome)
