Supreme Court Urged to Grant Standing in Surveillance Challenge
In its new term that began yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments over whether to affirm the right of journalists and human rights organizations to challenge the constitutionality of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act, or FAA.
The FISA Amendments Act authorizes the collection of a broad swath of public communications without a warrant (though not the intentional targeting of the communications of any particular U.S. person). As such, critics say, it jeopardizes freedom of communication with individuals abroad.
At issue is whether the plaintiffs, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, have the “standing” to bring the case. A lower court said they did not, but an appeals court said they did. It will be up to the Supreme Court to decide the case, which is captioned Amnesty et al v. Clapper.
The Electronic Privacy Information Center filed an amicus brief (which I co-signed) urging the Court to affirm standing on grounds that the plaintiffs have established a reasonable concern about the security of their communications, and that existing oversight mechanisms are inadequate.
“This threat to privacy is especially acute given the capabilities of the National Security Agency and the absence of meaningful oversight. Where enormous surveillance capabilities and blanket secrecy coexist, the public may reasonably fear the interception and collection of private communications,” the EPIC brief stated.
Furthermore, the current structure “lacks significant public oversight and accountability.”
“The public, the judiciary (but for the FISC [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]) and almost all Members of Congress are kept in the dark as to the most extensive electronic surveillance program undertaken by the US government. While the DNI and Attorney General provide internal reporting requirements, none of this information is made available to the whole Congress or the public broadly, and thus no meaningful public oversight can occur.”
“When the law gives new authority to conduct electronic surveillance, there should also be new means of oversight and accountability. The FISA Amendments Act fails this test,” the brief said.
The emphasis on interagency consensus, while well-intentioned, has become a structural impediment to bold or innovative policy options. When every agency effectively holds veto power over proposals, the path of least resistance becomes maintaining existing approaches with minor modifications.
The Federation of American Scientists supports H.R. 471, the re-introduction of the Fix Our Forests Act.
As people become less able to distinguish between what is real and what is fake, it has become easier than ever to be misled by synthetic content, whether by accident or with malicious intent. This makes advancing alternative countermeasures, such as technical solutions, more vital than ever before.
Throughout this phase of work, there are many actions hiring managers and staffing specialists can take to streamline the process and improve the quality of eligible candidates. Most importantly, hiring managers and staffing specialists can collaborate within and across agencies to expedite and simplify the process.