“In my professional opinion, the NSA domestic surveillance program is as blatantly illegal a program as I’ve seen,” said Prof. Harold Hongju Koh, dean of the Yale Law School, at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on February 28.
Others disagreed. “I believe that the inherent authority of the president under Article II, under these circumstances, permits the types of intercepts that are being undertaken,” said former DCI R. James Woolsey.
The opening statements from the February 28 hearing on “Wartime Executive Power and the NSA’s Surveillance Authority” may be found here.
The view that the NSA surveillance activity is illegal was elaborated in a legal memorandum that was presented to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court last week by the Center for National Security Studies and the Constitution Project.
Also last week, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) introduced legislation to establish “to investigate the instances of warrantless wiretapping and spying on U.S. citizens by the National Security Agency and other departments of Government.”
By preparing credible, bipartisan options now, before the bill becomes law, we can give the Administration a plan that is ready to implement rather than another study that gathers dust.
Even as companies and countries race to adopt AI, the U.S. lacks the capacity to fully characterize the behavior and risks of AI systems and ensure leadership across the AI stack. This gap has direct consequences for Commerce’s core missions.
The last remaining agreement limiting U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons has now expired. For the first time since 1972, there is no treaty-bound cap on strategic nuclear weapons.
As states take up AI regulation, they must prioritize transparency and build technical capacity to ensure effective governance and build public trust.