\n<\/p>\n
A senior Democratic aide familiar with the negotiations referred to the section as a \u201clegislative scam,\u201d telling WIRED: \u201cThere are many members who don’t quite understand the ins and outs of this law. Tossing the phrase \u2018Fourth Amendment requirement\u2019 into the bill is the speaker and the intelligence community working to dupe them into supporting a bill that has no meaningful constitutional safeguards.\u201d<\/p>\n
Section 5 directs the US attorney general to revoke existing rules on congressional access to the secret court that oversees the 702 program and issue new ones within 60 days. The provision is not self-executing: The access it promises is only as broad as the attorney general chooses to make it.<\/p>\n
Section 6 is the only provision in the bill with any prospective bite. It strikes language in current law that lets an FBI supervisor, or any employee of equivalent rank, approve a query of the 702 database using an American’s identifier, leaving the decision to an attorney. The same attorneys, however, sit within the class of career employees the administration reclassified as at-will last month.<\/p>\n
Finally, Section 7 orders the Government Accountability Office to audit the program’s targeting procedures within a year and report to the House and Senate intelligence and judiciary committees. The audit is nonbinding. Whether it produces anything of value depends on whether the intelligence community gives GAO real access to the technical mechanisms it is meant to examine.<\/p>\n
The bill’s Democratic support is being whipped by Representative Jim Himes, the Connecticut Democrat who serves as ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee. Himes, a member of the Gang of Eight briefed on the bureau’s most sensitive operations, has justified his position largely by saying he is personally unaware of any abuse of the program under the current administration\u2014an appeal to ignorance that sits uneasily alongside his simultaneous reliance on compliance numbers produced by an FBI oversight office that Patel closed 11 months ago.<\/p>\n
Pressure on Himes from within his district is building. On Thursday, a coalition of Connecticut organizations called on him to step down as ranking member, accusing him of \u201chelping Donald Trump preserve warrantless surveillance\u201d and \u201cfalsely and repeatedly claiming intelligence agencies do not purchase data broker information on people in the United States.\u201d<\/p>\n
Himes did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In a previous statement, he told WIRED that he had seen \u201czero evidence of abuse\u201d of the 702 program under the Trump administration, called Section 702 the country\u2019s \u201cmost important and most rigorously overseen foreign intelligence collection tool,\u201d and said he would only urge members to reauthorize the program if he\u2019d seen no suggestion that the administration was using Section 702 for \u201cillegal or improper purposes.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThe latest House FISA bill is a rubber stamp for Trump and Kash Patel to spy on Americans without a warrant,\u201d Senator Ron Wyden, who sits on the Senate intelligence committee, said in a statement. \u201cDon\u2019t fall for fake reforms. Tell anyone who will listen, Americans need to stop warrantless surveillance. Instead of ending warrantless surveillance or creating more transparency about government spying, this bill only requires a few more Trump administration officials to check a box. That always leads to more abuses, not less.\u201d<\/p>\n
Former Republican House Judiciary chair Bob Goodlatte, now with the nonpartisan Project for Privacy and Surveillance Accountability, tells WIRED that the bill’s marquee provision aimed at swaying members on the fence merely restates conduct \u201calready forbidden by law\u201d and creates no real impediment for FBI agents determined to search Americans\u2019 private communications.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is a disappointment,\u201d Goodlatte says. \u201cBut I take heart from the fact that 228 House Members voted last week to oppose a clean reauthorization of a similar proposal. Sixty percent of Republicans voted two years ago for a warrant requirement. This is far from over.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n