NSA decision is good start to restoring balance

The National Security Agency has decided to halt one controversial surveillance program that was the tip of an iceberg of government abuses of privacy and due process.

This is a good start toward restoring balance in Americans’ right to privacy.

The NSA said last week that it will no longer engage in warrantless spying on Americans’ digital communications that merely mention a foreign intelligence target, referred to in the intelligence community as “about” communications.

The NSA had claimed this authority under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which allows it to target non U.S. citizens or residents believed to be outside the country.

However, Americans’ communications are often swept up as well.

“NSA will no longer collect certain internet communications that merely mention a foreign intelligence target,” an agency statement said.

“Instead, NSA will limit such collection to internet communications that are sent directly to or from a foreign target.”

It is a significant departure from previous assurances that the program was vital to national security.

Its effectiveness has always been difficult to gauge because the NSA has provided little information about it.

It’s a welcome swing toward better privacy protection.

It is widely speculated, however, that this is less an acknowledgement of Americans’ right to privacy than a result of communications by Donald Trump’s people before the election being swept up in NSA data collection.

Our enthusiasm for the decision requires a reality check, however.

The NSA has repeatedly lied about its spying activities and violations of Americans’ constitutional rights, so announcing a new policy doesn’t necessarily mean it will be followed.

Remember the public testimony of then-National Intelligence Director James Clapper at a March 2013 Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.

At one point, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., asked Clapper plainly, “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions, or hundreds of millions of Americans?”

Clapper then lied to his face, and the faces of all Americans, saying, “No, sir,” and then, “Not wittingly.”

Just months later, news stories based on information from the Edward Snowden leaks would reveal the NSA’s bulk collection of Americans’ phone metadata and internet communications.

New technology makes our communications quicker, more convenient, more easily recorded and stored — and more easily accessed without our knowledge.

But the Fourth Amendment is quite clear:

Government searches require a warrant issued by a judge based on probable cause and describing the specific “place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The law was written to deal with filing cabinets and safes rather than the cloud.

But the fundamental principle stands and should always stand.

The Fourth Amendment is quite clear: Government searches require a warrant issued by a judge based on probable cause and describing the specific “place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”