Massie-Lofgren Would Shut Down ALL Back Door Searches under Section 702

There are two details about the Massie-Lofgren Amendmentwhich passed the house by a 293-123 vote last night — that are currently being missed. First, the bill would shut down all back door searches under Section 702.

Except as provided in subsection (b), none of the funds made available by this Act may be used by an officer or employee of the United States to query a collection of foreign intelligence information acquired under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1881a) using a United States person identifier.

That means it would apply to FBI, in addition to CIA and NSA (which is what some people are reporting).

That’s the other detail people are missing. According to the John Bates opinion in which he first authorized back door searches for NSA and CIA in 2011, a third agency, which another document says is the FBI, had had that authority going back to 2008. According to the same language, FBI also had the authority to conduct back door searches on traditional FISA taps, which they would retain under this amendment.

 

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+1Email to someone

10 Responses to Massie-Lofgren Would Shut Down ALL Back Door Searches under Section 702

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz RT @LisaBloom: Notice that not a single leak has been unfavorable to Darren Wilson, though 6 witnesses say Mike Brown was shot with his han…
23mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel I wish people would stop abusing pumpkin. But at least butternut squash has been allowed to retain its dignity.
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz The leaks of grand jury material in #MikeBrown case are deplorable; that said, Missouri law on unauthorized GJ disclosure look quite weak,
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @tamarbirckhead: @JustADCohen @abfettig My new original research on juvenile solitary confinement across the globe. http://t.co/CeI9ZY3D
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @dmataconis Maybe, but I think the original purposes are still valid. Also think Musk is a whiny asshole.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @dmataconis Actually original intent was to insure there are parts+service available locally for customers. And to provide local tax base
3hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @dmataconis Either way they can't be selective, which is what Musk desires. May be outdated, but there are good reasons to keep it.
3hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @kevinjonheller Really no need for trial either I should think.
3hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @emptywheel @wellsbennett Come on man, go easy of Wells. He has been overwhelmed with the new "Ask Wells Anything" feature at @lawfareblog
3hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @RobertsDan @lrozen At the complete trashing of procedural due process and substantive jurisdiction law, but what the hell, right?
3hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @ScottGreenfield @bobambrogi "Reinvent"™ the interview
3hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @chriskingstl @alicesperi I know push is on to say supports Wilson+cops, but no reason to bite off on that w/o noting both @JasonLeopold
3hreplyretweetfavorite
June 2014
S M T W T F S
« May   Jul »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930