Dems, Republicans are leery about surveillance practices

WASHINGTON — As it pushes to renew a cornerstone law that authorizes major surveillance programs, the Biden administration faces an American public that’s broadly skeptical of common intelligence practices and of the need to sacrifice civil liberties for security.

Congress in the coming months will debate whether to extend Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Section 702 authorizes U.S. spy agencies to collect large amounts of foreign communications for intelligence purposes ranging from stopping spies to listening in on allies and foes. Those collection programs also sweep up U.S. citizen communications that can then be searched by intelligence and law enforcement officers.

The new poll from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows that Democrats and Republicans have similar views on surveillance tactics, while Republicans have become substantially less likely over the last decade to say it’s at least sometimes necessary to sacrifice freedom in response to threats.

U.S. intelligence officials say Section 702 is necessary to protect national security and to counter China, Russia and other adversaries. They credit the program with better informing U.S. diplomats and enabling operations such as last year’s strike to kill a key plotter of 9/11.

But officials will have to overcome sharp divisions in Congress and bipartisan anger at the FBI, though most observers still believe Section 702 will be renewed in some form.

Driving a political shift is increasing skepticism among Republican elected officials of the FBI and intelligence agencies. Conservatives have battered the FBI for misleading the primary surveillance court in its investigation into former President Donald Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.

Historically, “the left flank has been the more vocal objector to government surveillance on privacy and civil liberties grounds,” said Carter Burwell, who was chief counsel to Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, when the law was last renewed in early 2018.

”Over the past five or 10 years, with the rise of the libertarian wing of the Republican Party, call it the anti-government wing of the Republican Party, that is an equally vocal and powerful plurality,” said Burwell, now a lawyer at the firm Debevoise & Plimpton.

The poll asked U.S. adults whether they support several practices authorized by Section 702. It found that 28 percent of adults support the government listening to phone calls made outside of the United States without a warrant, while 44 percent oppose the practice. Views are similar about the U.S. reading emails sent between people outside of the U.S. without a warrant.

The public was more receptive to surveillance of activity outside of the U.S. a decade after 9/11. That shifted significantly by the 20th anniversary of the attacks in 2021.

In the latest poll, 48 percent of Americans said they believed it necessary to sacrifice their rights and freedoms to prevent terrorism, down from 54 percent in 2021 and nearly two-thirds in 2011. That shift was especially dramatic among Republicans, with just 44 percent saying that’s sometimes necessary, compared with 69 percent in 2011. Among Democrats, 55 percent still say so, similar to the 59 percent who said so in 2011.

White adults were somewhat more likely to say they were opposed to various forms of surveillance — 48 percent said they opposed the government listening to foreign calls without a warrant — than Black or Hispanic adults, each at 34 percent.

In Congress, some Democrats and Republicans have found common cause over their complaints about Section 702. Two lawmakers this year issued a statement calling for an end to U.S. surveillance without a warrant. Rep. Pramila Jayapal, DWash., chairs the liberal Congressional Progressive Caucus, while Rep. Warren Davidson, ROhio, is a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus.

“We must take this opportunity to reform Section 702 and overhaul privacy protections for Americans so that they truly protect the civil rights, civil liberties and privacy rights that are foundational to our democracy,” Jayapal and Davidson said.

Previous efforts by lawmakers to require warrants for searching intelligence databases have failed. Intelligence officials argue they have ramped up training for agents searching the databases and tightened requirements to consult with lawyers on sensitive queries.