Leahy Freedom Act Exempts FBI from Counting Its Back Door Searches

As I said in my post last night, Pat Leahy’s version of USA Freedom Act is a significant improvement over USA Freedumber, the watered down House version. But it includes language that no one I’ve met has been able to explain. I believe it may permit the NSA to have its immunized telecom providers contact chain on (at least) location, and possibly worse. Thus, it may well be everyone applauding the bill — including privacy NGOs — are applauding increased use of techniques like location spying even as judges around the country are deeming such spying unconstitutional. I strongly believe this bill may expand the universe of US persons who will be thrown into the corporate store indefinitely, to be subjected to the full brunt of NSA’s analytical might.

But that’s not the part of the bill that disturbs me the most. It’s this language:

‘(3) FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION.—

Subparagraphs (B)(iv), (B)(v), (D)(iii), (E)(iii), and (E)(iv) of paragraph (1) of subsection (b) shall not apply to information or records held by, or queries conducted by, the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The language refers, in part,  to requirements that the government report to Congress:

(B) the total number of orders issued pursuant to section 702 and a good faith estimate of—

(iv) the number of search terms that included information concerning a United States person that were used to query any database of the contents of electronic communications or wire communications obtained through the use of an order issued pursuant to section 702; and

(v) the number of search queries initiated by an officer, employee, or agent of the United States whose search terms included information concerning a United States person in any database of noncontents information relating to electronic communications or wire communications that were obtained through the use of an order issued pursuant to section 702;

These are back door searches on US person identifiers of Section 702 collected data — both content (iv) and metadata (v).

In other words, after having required the government to report how many back door searches of US person data it conducts, the bill then exempts the FBI.

The FBI — the one agency whose use of such data can actually result in a prosecution of the US person in question.

We already know the government has not provided all defendants caught using 702 data notice. And yet, having recognized the need to start counting how many Americans get caught in back door searches, Patrick Leahy has decided to exempt the agency that uses back door searches the most.

And if they’re not giving defendants notice (and they’re not), then this is an illegal use of Section 702.

There is no reason to exempt the FBI for this. On the contrary, if we’re going to count back door searches on US persons, the first place we should start counting is at FBI, where it likely matters most. But the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee has decided it’s a good idea to exempt precisely those back door searches from reporting requirements.

 

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+4Email to someone

2 Responses to Leahy Freedom Act Exempts FBI from Counting Its Back Door Searches

  • 1
  • 2
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @daveweigel You saw me brainstorming what kind of Majority Leader Cornyn would be?
17mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @flexlibris: Former FBI agent Mike German is talking about how CVE masquerades as "community outreach" when in fact it's an intelligence…
28mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @mattapuzzo Well, see? They have to finished something.
35mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @mattapuzzo Tho I trust the Ferguson GJ is more real than that DOJ review of NYPD's civil rights violations.
37mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @mattapuzzo Also that DOJ review of NYPD's civil rights violations...
38mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @mattapuzzo Given that no one has been nominated and GOP has promised to stall AND prolly will have a majority after that, not saying much.
39mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Isn't spending $1.8M of your own money to win election against someone who has been disqualified itself disqualifying? This is so confusing
43mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Why is Mitch McConnell lending his $1.8M when Secretary of State Chuck Todd has DQed McConnell's opponent?
44mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV RT @RiosJose559: We can't understand shootings in the #USA unless they "converted to Islam"
50mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @astepanovich Particularly given that Microsoft warrant challenge for a server in Ireland.
50mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @kdrum Fuck, I'm sorry. Best wishes for you.
1hreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV Just did earlier this afternoon. RT @5wa: Vote #YesOn2, #Florida http://t.co/Loxr8gUJFC
1hreplyretweetfavorite
July 2014
S M T W T F S
« Jun   Aug »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031