Daily News (Los Angeles)

Congress votes against the 4th Amendment

-

One of our essential liberties is keeping our private matters safe from the snooping eyes of the government. It's enshrined in the Fourth Amendment “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonab­le searches and seizures.”

At issue in Congress is the reauthoriz­ation of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligen­ce Surveillan­ce Act. Because communicat­ions in foreign countries are not protected by the Fourth Amendment, FISA allows broad intercepts of communicat­ions involving people in other countries. In the digital age, however, the communicat­ions of Americans can easily be swept up in government intercepts of communicat­ions involving people in other countries.

Unfortunat­ely the U.S.

House of Representa­tives failed to affirm Fourth Amendment protection­s for American communicat­ions by defeating an amendment to mandate getting a warrant when the government uses FISA to spy on Americans. The vote was 212212. Mainly it was Democrats who voted against the protection­s, with 84 in favor and 126 against; while Republican­s mostly favored the protection­s, 128-86.

With the defeat of those protection­s, the House overwhelmi­ngly voted to pass the reauthoriz­ation by a bipartisan vote of 273 to 147. President Joe Biden pushed for the reauthoriz­ation. Presumptiv­e Republican presidenti­al nominee Donald Trump opposed it, claiming FISA was used by the government to spy on him during his presidenti­al campaign.

Biden's National Security Adviser, Jake Sullivan, hailed the vote as ensuring the intelligen­ce community has the tools to protect Americans against “hostile nation states, terrorist organizati­ons, hackers, spies, and more.”

This enthusiasm wasn't shared by the members of Congress who seem at least vaguely familiar with the Bill of Rights.

“This is a sad day for America,” lamented Rep. Tom Massie, R-Kentucky, who backed a warrant requiremen­t. Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-New York, explained that when the government searches what's called the 702 database for Americans' communicat­ions, it's

“the constituti­onal equivalent of conducting a warrantles­s search.” He further noted that's happened “278,000 times, in fact, at last count, in 2021 alone.”

Reauthoriz­ation of Section 702 as currently written, if passed by the Senate, actually would be worse than current law. Warned Patrick G. Eddington of the libertaria­n Cato Institute, “The clear expansion of FISA surveillan­ce this bill represents virtually guarantees additional abuses of the constituti­onal rights of Americans.”

Among local representa­tives, votes against the warrant requiremen­t and for reauthoriz­ation came from Republican­s like Young Kim, Ken Calvert, Jay Obernolte and Mike Garcia, along with Democrats like Pete Aguilar, Linda Sanchez, Lou Correa, Adam Schiff and Mike Levin.

Democratic Reps. Katie Porter, Robert Garcia and Judy Chu, to their credit, favored a warrant requiremen­t and voted against the final bill. And Steel did vote for a warrant requiremen­t, but chose to vote in favor of reauthoriz­ation without it.

We expect our representa­tives to take special care in protecting the constituti­onal rights of Americans. Except for a few, they have failed to do so and have instead chosen to trample over the Fourth Amendment.

The Senate is expected to act soon. They probably won't, but they ought to listen to colleague Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, who said, “The House bill represents one of the most dramatic and terrifying expansions of government surveillan­ce authority in history.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States