The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, in conjunction with the Justice Department, released a March 5 opinion from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The opinion pertains to a proposed novel electronic surveillance technique and its compliance with Title I of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The opinion can be found here and below.
Latest in FISC
We propose a solution to fix the perceived defects in U.S. surveillance law identified recently by the EU’s judicial branch.
The department argues that a provision giving greater power to amici arguing before the FISA Court could endanger national security. That argument strains credulity.
The House passed a bipartisan FISA reform bill. What are the substantive changes the bill proposes?
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) on Wednesday largely accepted changes the FBI plans to make to its process for seeking warrants. The court also temporarily barred some FBI officials mentioned in the Office of the Inspector General's report from appearing before the court.
In response to the Justice Department inspector general report on the Russia investigation, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has issued an order requiring the government to provide a sworn written statement by Jan. 10, 2020 on what the Justice Department has done and plans to do to ensure that statements of fact in each FISA application filing to the court are complete and accurate. The document is available here and below.
The director of the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts released the following report on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s activities during 2017. The report states that the FISC received 1,614 applications—granting 1,147, modfying 391 in part, denying 50 in part, and denying 26 in full.
The mystery as to why there was no Section 702 application or certification reported for 2016 has now been solved (I'm assuming readers know today's big 702 news, flagged by Quinta here, and as explored in detail by Charlie Savage in this article): NSA has been struggling to resolve a problem with "about" collection under the Upstream heading, including in particular a problem with analysts quering the fruits of that c
In Rare En Banc Session, Surveillance Court to Reconsider Whether ACLU Can Seek Release of Documents
All 11 judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court will rehear an ACLU claim that it has standing to assert a First Amendment right to see FISC decisions upholding the government’s bulk data collection program.
The hearing appears to be just the second time in the FISC’s history that it has publicly stated that it will meet en banc (it is unclear whether it has held secret en banc sessions).
Does the FISA court perform a recognizably judicial function when it reviews 702 minimization procedures for compliance with the Fourth amendment? Our guest for episode 115 is Orin Kerr, GWU professor and all-round computer crime guru.