Latest in Surveillance
How will the coronavirus outbreak affect government surveillance law? While even the precise short-term effects are hazy, we can already see signs of a permanent and far-reaching expansion of the surveillance state.
On March 14, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced a plan to employ advanced digital monitoring tools, mainly used for counterterrorism purposes, to track carriers of the coronavirus and mitigate the spread of COVID-19.
A new study produced by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) found that the NSA's program analyzing call detail records yielded only a single significant investigation between 2015 and 2019.
As the U.S. government and the U.S. public consider the potential future use and regulation of facial surveillance, the debate in the U.K. can help to inform the U.S. discussion, particularly in terms of how law enforcement may use, and can abuse, the technology.
Lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union and federal public defenders filed an opening brief on behalf of Jamshid Muhtorov in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Mr.
The body of Jamal Khashoggi has yet to be found, and the case of his murder is littered with unanswered questions. There are a number of certainties about the gruesome crime, however, backed up by evidence, including that some of his most private communications were monitored by Saudi intelligence.
In recognition of the changing role of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (FISCR); the difficulty finding and searching the more than 70 FISC/FISCR declassified opinions and 270 orders in the public domain; the increasing complexity of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA); the myriad statutory reporting requirements; and the rapidly expanding treatment of FISA in ordinary, Article III courts, I am delighted to announce the creation of the digital Foreign Intelligence Law Collection.
Last fall, Lawfare published a piece by Ian Levy and Crispin Robinson of GCHQ entitled Principles for a More Informed Exceptional Access Debate.
[Update: Several colleagues have pointed out that I did not make sufficiently clear that there is an alternate (and much less intriguing) explanation for the 1806(c) notices here.
The Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Justice has released a report on the Drug Enforcement Agency's use of administrative subpoenas for bulk data collection and exploitation, without comprehensive legal review, in drug investigations involving Americans. The full report is available here and below.