US Congress passes short-term renewal of Fisa warrantless spying powers | US news

US Congress passed the 45-day deadline Expanding the law that gives U.S. intelligence agencies warrantless spying authority.

Fierce infighting in the Republican wing of Congress over Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act has repeatedly disrupted plans by conservative leaders to renew the controversial surveillance law for several years. The stalemate continued Thursday, with Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson refusing to include key reforms pushed by hardliners in his party and progressive Democrats.

In statements before the final vote in the House of Representatives, lawmakers who oppose a long-term extension of Section 702 again called on Johnson to address their concerns about how the surveillance program is being abused to spy on Americans.

“If the Speaker actually sits down with us, we’re willing to give you another 45 days to negotiate this,” said U.S. congressman Jamie Raskin, a Democrat from Maryland who opposes extending the program without any changes. “If we’re willing to move on from all the chaos and confusion that we’ve seen in the last few days, if we’re willing to sit down and have a meaningful conversation and write legislation, we can make that happen.”

Hardline Republicans who take issue with Section 702 also welcomed Raskin’s remarks, as they too expressed fears about how the program spies on Americans’ communications. “FISA databases have been used to interrogate political activists, members of Congress and their staff, random romantic interests of FBI agents, and we’re told, ‘Oh, don’t worry, it’s not being abused anymore,'” said Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky. Massie tried but failed to block the 45-day extension, noting: “A short-term violation of the constitution is still a violation of the constitution.”

The controversial vote marks the second time this month that Congress has failed to agree on a renewal of Fisa, leading to a short-term extension. The law expires without reauthorization; The closest deadline was midnight Thursday. Section 702 was originally scheduled to expire on April 20, but Congress passed a stopgap measure to extend the surveillance program by 10 days after disagreements over the extension with no substantive changes. The decision to suspend the issue for a few weeks suggests that these differences are unlikely to be resolved any time soon.

Section 702, first enacted in 2008, allows national security agencies to collect and review texts and emails sent to and from aliens living outside the United States without a warrant. If an American is talking to a non-American target living abroad, their communications may also be cut off. Privacy advocates say the law is intended to spy on foreigners outside the United States, but the federal government is using the loophole to spy on Americans without permission, an unconstitutional practice. Intelligence agencies say they need these surveillance powers to prevent terrorist attacks. A warrant requirement to spy on Americans’ communications is the most urgent demand of privacy advocates and lawmakers concerned about the reauthorization of Section 702. Republican leadership has so far ignored these concerns.

“It’s important for our government to understand what the bad guys are planning to do to our citizens and our nation,” Republican Jim Jordan, chairman of the House judiciary committee, said Thursday. Jordan had previously requested a search warrant to prevent abuses, but requested a definitive extension last month. Donald Trump made the same 180-degree turn.

Critics said the bill’s proposed reforms do little more than restate existing law and renewed calls for warrants to spy on Americans. “Under this bill, FBI agents can still collect, search and examine the communications of Americans without having to have a judge review them, and that is at the core of the 14th amendment, that search warrants must be based on probable cause,” Raskin said Thursday.

U.S. senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon who advocates for privacy rights, said he had won in negotiations over the surveillance program. Wyden reported an agreement in

Privacy advocates blamed Johnson for the failure to pass a long-term Fisa extension because he refused to consider voting on meaningful reform such as a consent requirement. “Not allowing this would subvert the democratic process and do so at the expense of America’s constitutional rights,” said Hannah James, counsel for the Brennan Center’s liberty and national security program. They say the legislative process was fairer two years ago, the last time Congress reauthorized Fisa.

“For Speaker Johnson, it’s been my way or the highway this time,” said Jake Laperruque, deputy director of the security and surveillance project at the Center for Democracy and Technology. In 2024, lawmakers voted to amend the permit requirement, but that amendment failed after resulting in a dramatic 212-212 tie.

Surveillance under Section 702 could continue through March 2027 even if Congress does not extend the law by then because it is conducted through year-round certifications approved by a special federal court that provides judicial oversight of intelligence agencies’ activities. That’s why the push to pass the Section 702 extension before the congressional deadline is mostly a “scare tactic,” James said. “Members are uncomfortable with the underlying idea of ​​statutory statutes of limitations,” but the way the statutes are currently written makes it clear that all existing certificates and directives remain valid.

Trump has repeatedly urged Republicans’ objections to Fisa to comply with party leadership. He said on Truth Social that the surveillance program is vital to protecting the military and Americans at home from foreign terrorist attacks. But two years ago, he told lawmakers to “KILL FISA” after accusing the FBI of abusing the law to spy on the 2016 campaign.

But on April 15 Real Social post Advocating for the renewal of Article 702 without any changes, the president acknowledged some of the downsides of doing so and noted: “I am willing to risk giving up my Rights and Privileges as a Citizen of our Great Army and Country!”