Read

Search form

Surveillance in the Age of Trump: What Does FISA Reauthorization Mean for Our Privacy?

Surveillance in the Age of Trump: What Does FISA Reauthorization Mean for Our Privacy?
Thu, 2/8/2018 - by Kate Harveston

In 2013, Edward Snowden opened Americans' eyes to a greater extent of our government’s surveillance capabilities. But while any good Samaritan might have reviewed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and seen how it could potentially harm people living in the United States, life after Snowden’s revelations has been conducted under the business-as-usual assumption that government powers grant it access to nearly any “private” form of communication between citizens.

The fact is, the power of our government to intercept those communications is still granted by FISA, also known as the Patriot Act. Like many government articles, FISA must be periodically renewed – and with last month's bi-partisan renewal for 2018, the act not only continues to grant our government access to a vast landscape private communications but expands government powers under section 702 of the law.

So what does this mean for you and me, and why should we be concerned?
 

How the Government Uses FISA

Technically, FISA only grants the government access to communications with people living outside the U.S. However, in practise it means that any conversation between someone here in the U.S. and another party suspected of living outside U.S. borders can be redacted without the need for a warrant. For example, communications between former national security adviser Michael Flynn and Sergey Kislyak of the Russian government were obtained through use of FISA.

FISA also allows the U.S. government to petition social media platforms like Google and Facebook to hand over private communications that occur on their platforms. However, when interactions occur between two U.S. citizens, they are not formally subject to the law defined in section 702. Not every request is fulfilled, and tech companies have made a policy of reporting the number of government requests for private citizens' data.
 

Section 702 and How it Changes in 2018

Last month's FISA reauthorization by Congress enables the government to obtain such private communications without a warrant for another six years. But what's newsworthy is that the powers of section 702 have been expanded in a way that few Americans might be aware.

For example, a newly drafted amendment by the House of Representatives would have added a number of new privacy measures to section 702, shoring up the rights of U.S. citizens who are being undeservedly investigated for communicating outside the country. However, the FISA version that was just passed makes warrantless seizures simpler, not harder, for government investigators to carry out.

Take people's so-called "about" searches. Often the stuff of popular conversation, this type of profiling allows government to investigate any individual taking part in a dialogue where specific details align with security initiatives. For instance, if people discuss the address of a terrorist target, it's likely to get picked up.

"About" searches were performed under the previous version of FISA, but were later halted because the National Security Agency felt there wasn't specific enough information available in the intercepted communications to ensure that innocent Americans weren't having their information unfairly collected. With the new FISA changes, that is no longer a concern.
 

The Upshot for Everyday Americans

For starters, it's wise to continue not using the term "the bomb" as a positive descriptor in digital communications. The language in the new amendment is somewhat murky and does make mention of a warrant in some places, but not in order to improve security. The warrant is only necessary for the FBI to do research in situations when matters of national security aren't involved. Anything that can be declared a national security matter is relieved of the warrant requirement.

The takeaway: The new amendment allows investigation into any communication where reference to a target is made. For example, sending an email to a friend with a reference to ISIS in the text could cause that communication to get swept into an NSA database. Any people who took part in that conversation could come under further investigation.
 

Trump Lends His Confused Commentary

President Donald Trump felt it was appropriate to share his opinion about the importance of renewing the FISA bill by tweeting his support. But like on most other occasions, he provided a source of mixed messaging to say the least.

At first, Trump suggested that the Obama administration may have used the powers granted by FISA to spy on Trump during the 2016 campaign. Then Trump changed his tone, adding that he had “personally directed a fix to the unmasking process.” Later, he went on to add that Congress had renewed the amendment, calling it the right thing to do for the American people and detailing that section 702 wasn’t the part of FISA used against him by Obama.

Trump also suggested that he would have preferred to make the amendment permanent instead of only renewing it for a six-year period. It's an interesting idea at a time when so many Americans are fearful about their privacy – and when the president himself is under federal investigation for possible collusion with a foreign government and obstruction of justice, among other suspected crimes.

Sign Up

Article Tabs

Twenty states, backed by Donald Trump’s Department of Justice, are trying in the courts to dismantle the law by attacking what they see as its Achilles heel: the individual mandate.

occupy, creative activism, activism, act out e165

A backlog that's symptomatic of a patriarchal system that not only devalues women but devalues survivors of sexual assault.

E.U. trade, U.S. trade war, aluminium tariffs, steel tariffs

“These tariffs aren’t even legal under U.S. law, let alone World Trade Organization laws. It seems rather odd to be citing national security and targeting countries including your closest allies.”

public banking, public banks, Bank of North Dakota, public financing, financing infrastructure, Wall Street influence, private-public investments

Private interests’ influence over banking consumes, rather than sustains, the public good.

Dodd-Frank act, Volcker Rule, bank deregulation, Wall Street lobby, proprietary trading, SEC

By revising the Volcker Rule, a centerpiece of the 2010 Dodd-Frank act, the feds are pushing financial regulation in a direction that should worry everyone.

The Trump administration has backtracked on its policy but offered no immediate plan for reuniting families. Photograph: Guillermo Arias/AFP/Getty Images

NGOs say bringing parents and children back together is an enormous puzzle with no clear system from the administration.

EPA, pollution deaths, pollution risks, Donald Trump, Scott Pruitt, respiratory illness

The authors used EPA’s own risk assessments to estimate the number of illnesses and early deaths prevented by clean air and water rules Trump is now trying to erase.

The Associated Press reports that young migrant children forcibly separated from their parents are being sent to facilities that critics described as "prisons for babies." (Photo: @NIJC/Twitter)

Those who have visited the facilites describe "play rooms of crying preschool-age children in crisis."

Twenty states, backed by Donald Trump’s Department of Justice, are trying in the courts to dismantle the law by attacking what they see as its Achilles heel: the individual mandate.

wage theft, corporate crimes, CEO pay,

An eye-opening new report has documented billions of dollars of corporate theft from workers. The government is turning a blind eye.

public banking, public banks, Bank of North Dakota, public financing, financing infrastructure, Wall Street influence, private-public investments

Private interests’ influence over banking consumes, rather than sustains, the public good.

Posted 5 days 18 hours ago
E.U. trade, U.S. trade war, aluminium tariffs, steel tariffs

“These tariffs aren’t even legal under U.S. law, let alone World Trade Organization laws. It seems rather odd to be citing national security and targeting countries including your closest allies.”

Posted 4 days 14 hours ago
U.S. Border Patrol agents take into custody a father and son from Honduras near the U.S.-Mexico border on June 12, 2018, near Mission, Texas. The asylum seekers were then sent to a processing center for possible separation. Photo: John Moore/Getty Images

A new report confirms that Trump and his advisers had been considering the brutal policy of separating migrant children from their parents at the border for as long as they’ve been in power.

Posted 5 days 18 hours ago
family separations, ICE, immigrant deportations,

The size and brutality of this particular raid in Ohio, along with the use of military tactics, have shocked even the most seasoned immigrants’ rights activists.

Posted 4 days 18 hours ago
occupy, creative activism, activism, act out e165

A backlog that's symptomatic of a patriarchal system that not only devalues women but devalues survivors of sexual assault.

Posted 3 days 12 hours ago
E.U. trade, U.S. trade war, aluminium tariffs, steel tariffs

“These tariffs aren’t even legal under U.S. law, let alone World Trade Organization laws. It seems rather odd to be citing national security and targeting countries including your closest allies.”

The Trump administration has backtracked on its policy but offered no immediate plan for reuniting families. Photograph: Guillermo Arias/AFP/Getty Images

NGOs say bringing parents and children back together is an enormous puzzle with no clear system from the administration.

occupy, creative activism, activism, act out e165

A backlog that's symptomatic of a patriarchal system that not only devalues women but devalues survivors of sexual assault.

Twenty states, backed by Donald Trump’s Department of Justice, are trying in the courts to dismantle the law by attacking what they see as its Achilles heel: the individual mandate.

family separations, ICE, immigrant deportations,

The size and brutality of this particular raid in Ohio, along with the use of military tactics, have shocked even the most seasoned immigrants’ rights activists.