For
more than two years, a handful of Democrats on the Senate intelligence
committee have warned that the government is secretly interpreting its
surveillance powers under the Patriot Act in a way that would be
alarming if the public — or even others in Congress — knew about it.
On [March 15], two of those senators — Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark
Udall of Colorado — went further. They said a top-secret intelligence
operation that is based on that secret legal theory is not as crucial to
national security as executive branch officials have maintained. The
Justice Department has argued that disclosing information about its
interpretation of the Patriot Act could alert adversaries to how the
government collects certain intelligence. It is seeking the dismissal of
two Freedom of Information Act lawsuits — by The New York Times and by the American Civil Liberties Union — related to how the Patriot Act has been interpreted. The
dispute centers on what the government thinks it is allowed to do under
Section 215 of the Patriot Act, under which agents may obtain a secret
order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court allowing them to
get access to any “tangible things” — like business records — that are
deemed “relevant” to a terrorism or espionage investigation.
The interpretation of Section 215 that authorizes this secret
surveillance operation is apparently not obvious from a plain text
reading of the provision, and was developed through a series of
classified rulings by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
Note: For key reports from major media sources on surveillance and other government restrictions of basic civil liberties, click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment