Congress Is Dropping the Ball with a Clean Extension of FISA

11 hours 51 minutes ago

Two years ago, Congress passed the “Reforming Intelligence and Securing America” Act (RISAA) that included nominal reforms to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The bill unfortunately included some problematic expansions of the law—but it also included a relatively big victory for civil liberties advocates: Section 702 authorities were only extended for two years, allowing Congress to continue the important work of negotiating a warrant requirement for Americans as well as some other critical reforms

However, Congress clearly did not continue this work. In fact, it now appears that Congress is poised to consider another extension of this program without even attempting to include necessary and common sense reforms. Most notably, Congress is not considering a requirement to obtain a warrant before looking at data on U.S. persons that was indiscriminately and warrantlessly collected. House Speaker Mike Johnson confirmed that “the plan is to move a clean extension of FISA … for at least 18 months.” 

Even more disappointing, House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, who has previously been a champion of both the warrant requirement and closing the data broker loophole, told the press he would vote for a clean extension of FISA, claiming that RISAA included enough reforms for the moment.

It’s important to note RISAA was just a reauthorization of this mass surveillance program with a long history of abuse. Prior to the 2024 reauthorization, Section 702 was already misused to run improper queries on peaceful protesters, federal and state lawmakers, Congressional staff, thousands of campaign donors, journalists, and a judge reporting civil rights violations by local police. RISAA further expanded the government’s authority by allowing it to compel a much larger group of people and providers into assisting with this surveillance. As we said when it passed, overall, RISAA is a travesty for Americans who deserve basic constitutional rights and privacy whether they are communicating with people and services inside or outside of the US.

Section 702 should not be reauthorized without any additional safeguards or oversight. Fortunately, there are currently three reform bills for Congress to consider: SAFE, PLEWSA, and GSRA. While none of these bills are perfect, they are all significantly better than the status quo, and should be considered instead of a bill that attempts no reform at all. 

Mass spying—accessing a massive amount of communications by and with Americans first and sorting out targets second and secretly—has always been a problem for our rights.  It was a problem at first when President George W. Bush authorized it in secret without Congressional or court oversight. And it remained a problem even after the passage of Section 702 in 2008 created the possibility of  some oversight. Congress was right that this surveillance is dangerous, and that's why it set Section 702 up for regular reconsideration. That reconsideration has not occurred, even as the circumstances of the NSA, Justice Department, and FBI leadership, have radically changed. Reform is long overdue, and now it's urgent.  

India McKinney

【リレー時評】変わる政治、変わらぬ沖縄の民意=黒島 美奈子(JCJ沖縄世話人) 

18 hours 12 minutes ago
 とうとうここまできたか―というのが正直な感想だ。さる8日に投開票が行われた衆院選の結果。小選挙区で沖縄1~4区は自民候補が全勝した。小選挙区制が導入された以降初めてとなる。自民全勝は中選挙区時代にもなかったから復帰後初の事態でもある。 本土ほどの熱狂はなかったものの、沖縄にも確かに「風」は吹いていた。これまで2区で6回立候補し、今回初めて小選挙区を制した宮崎政久氏の勝因の一つは高市早苗政権への期待だ。宮崎氏は前回から2万票余り伸ばし7万票超を獲得した。 ただ、「高市旋風」だ..
JCJ

FCC Chair Carr’s Threats to Punish Broadcasters Are Unconstitutional

19 hours 3 minutes ago

EFF joined other digital rights and civil liberties organizations in calling out the unconstitutionality of Federal Communications Commission chair Brendan Carr’s recent threats to punish broadcasters for airing statements he disagrees with. 

Carr’s recent threats, like his past threats, are unconstitutional efforts to coerce news coverage that favors President Donald Trump. He wrongly claims that the FCC’s “public interest” standard allows him and the commission to revoke the licenses of broadcasters who publish news that is unflattering to the government is anathema to our country’s core constitutional values. 

The First Amendment constrains the FCC’s authority to force broadcasters to toe the government’s line, even though broadcast licensees are required to operate in the “public interest, convenience, and necessity.” Imposing restrictions on licensees’ speech, especially viewpoint-based limitations, are still subject to First Amendment scrutiny even if, in some circumstances, that scrutiny differs somewhat from that applied to non-broadcast media. And the “public interest” requirement, as it were, has never been interpreted to allow the type of viewpoint-based punishment that Carr has threatened here.  

Everyone agrees that news reporting should strive for accuracy, but Carr’s threats have little do with that. Instead, his allegations of "falsity" are a proxy for retaliation based on (1) Carr’s subjective policy disagreements; (2) any criticism of Trump and the administration broadly; (3) treatment of anything that is not the official US government line about the Iran War as “false.” 

We join the call for Carr to withdraw these threats.

 

David Greene

[B] 【西サハラ会合は前進か後退か(ロス)」【西サハラ最新情報】  平田伊都子

22 hours 46 minutes ago
2026年3月6日、元国連西サハラ事務総長個人特使のクリストファー・ロス氏は、トランプ政権が秘密裏に進めている西サハラ会合の実態を<Diplomacy Now(現在の外交)>誌で明かしました。 クリストファー・ロスは20年以上、トリポリ(レバノン)、フェズ、アルジェで米国務省高官として勤務し、アルジェリアおよびシリアの米国大使を務め、2009年から2017年まで西サハラ担当国連事務総長の個人特使として、西サハラ人民投票の実現を目指しました。
日刊ベリタ

Digital rights of Uruguayan sex workers

1 day 13 hours ago
This research, led by sex workers in collaboration with feminist academics, identified the challenges and opportunities they face online, as well as the safety and self-care strategies they develop…
Analía Lavin

【お知らせ】JCJとして「立ち向かっていく」ということ=古川英一(JCJ事務局長)

1 day 17 hours ago
 一夜にして私たちの政治の風景は塗り変わりました。いま私たちは、呆然と立ちすくんでいるのではないでしょうか。東京でも大雪となった真冬の衆議院選挙は、自民党が単独で議席の3分の2余りを獲得しました。  解散する大義も必要もないこの選挙で、高市首相が訴えたのは「私を首相として選ぶのかどうか」「国論を二分するような政策実現させてほしい」というものでした。普通に考えれば、まずその政策を国会で論議したうえで、国民に信を問うのが筋でしょう。しかし高市首相は政策についても明確にしないまま、..
JCJ