Fourth Amendment Protection Act

Last updated

The Fourth Amendment Protection Acts, are a collection of state legislation aimed at withdrawing state support for bulk data (metadata) collection and ban the use of warrant-less data in state courts. They are proposed nullification laws that, if enacted as law, would prohibit the state governments from co-operating with the National Security Agency, whose mass surveillance efforts are seen as unconstitutional by the proposals' proponents. [1] Specific examples include the Kansas Fourth Amendment Preservation and Protection Act and the Arizona Fourth Amendment Protection Act . The original proposals were made in 2013 and 2014 by legislators in the American states of Utah, Washington, Arizona, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma and California. Some of the bills would require a warrant before information could be released, whereas others would forbid state universities from doing NSA research or hosting NSA recruiters, or prevent the provision of services such as water to NSA facilities. [2]

Contents

History

The events of the 9/11 terrorist attacks led to some sweeping changes in national security policies. Through the enactment of Title II: Enhanced Surveillance Procedures of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, many government agencies were granted increased power of surveillance. [3] Controversy arose from the increased surveillance that was granted. Proponents[ who? ] of the act argued that the increased surveillance measures were necessary for the protection and safety of the country, while detractors argued that the increased power of surveillance infringed upon Fourth Amendment protections.[ citation needed ] [4]

Among the controversial programs that were put into place was the President's Surveillance Program, which embodied the Terrorist Surveillance Program. [5] Through this surveillance program, President George W. Bush authorized the NSA to wiretap international calls where one party was suspected of having affiliations with Al Qaeda. It also reportedly allowed for data mining of emails, internet activity, text messaging and telephone call records, [6] stored in a NSA call database. [7]

The Terrorist Surveillance Program became publicly known after several NSA whistleblowers, William E. Binney, Ed Loomis, Thomas A. Drake and J. Kirk Wiebe, came forward with information about the agency's database collection program, Trailblazer, which eliminated the privacy protections for U.S. citizens that its predecessor, the ThinThread Project, promised. [8] [9] [10] The information presented by Binney, Loomis, Drake and Wiebe brought the controversial practices of the NSA to the public eye, further inciting the controversy around the increased power that government agencies were granted. Information continued to come forward through many national news sources over the next several years about continuation of data collection programs carried out by government agencies. [11] [12] [13] [14]

In 2013, former NSA whistle-blower, Edward Snowden, came forward with information about continued surveillance on US Citizens through the PRISM surveillance project, that allowed the NSA to collect communications from providers like Google Inc., Yahoo and Verizon among others. [15] [16] [17] [18] Collected data was stored in the NSA database Boundless Informant and collected through the NSA Analytical tool XKeyscore, which allowed for the collection of most any form of data, from emails, to social media, and web browsing history. [19] Snowden's revelations and released documents detailed that the NSA's data collection programs were much broader, deeper, and insidious than previously released information had shown, and included collection of data even from users of Xbox Live, World of Warcraft and Second Life, as well as NSA agents spying on their own love interests. [20] [21]

In 2014, former U.S. State Department whistle-blower, John Tye, wrote an opinion piece in the Washington Post, outlining his concerns over data collection under Executive Order 12333. [22] Part 2.3 (i) allows that "incidentally obtained information that may indicate involvement in activities that may violate federal, state, local or foreign laws" may be collected, retained and disseminated. [23]

In light of all of the information that came out over the previous 12–13 years, many states began invoking their Tenth Amendment rights to propose and enact Fourth Amendment Protection Acts in order to stop NSA collection within those states, or to disallow any unconstitutionally collected data to be utilized in state courts. Some states proposed actions to stop NSA Centers from accessing state controlled utilities, such as water and electricity, in an effort to block NSA data collections from within the state.

Fourth Amendment Protection Act by state

California

On January 6, 2014, the state of California proposed Senate Bill 828 (2013–14). It was introduced by senators Ted Lieu and Joel Anderson, with the intention of adding Chapter 32.5 (commencing with Section 7599) to the state government's code. Its intention aimed to prohibit providing any resources, participation, or aid of any sort to requests made by federal agencies that attempt to collect metadata by means in which the state finds illegal. Furthermore, it would prohibit agencies such as the NSA from using public universities as recruitment centers, as well as prohibiting such agencies from performing research on campus grounds. [24] On November 30, 2014, it was approved by the governor and was accepted into California State law. [25] [26]

Washington

In the state of Washington, multiple bills have been proposed in order to offer protections from certain NSA data collection operations. Specifically, those conducted without warrants. In 2017, House Bill 1193 (2017-18) was introduced, and given its first reading on January 13. [27] Its primary intention was to prevent the use of data and online information obtained without a proper warrant from being used as evidence against individuals being prosecuted in a court of law. It would also prohibit the utilization of state resources and services for data collection operations that the state deems unconstitutional. In addition, any persons or corporations found to have been providing services to federal agencies for unconstitutional purposes would be guilty of misdemeanors. [28] As of 2018, the bill remains in committee. An earlier version of the bill was proposed in 2013 as House Bill 2272. [29]

Arizona

Similar to California's Fourth Amendment Protection Act, Arizona State had also proposed their own protections under Senate Bill 1156 (2014). It was supported by many members of the Senate, including its president at the time, Andy Biggs. In Arizona, it would have prevented digital information obtained without a warrant from being used in court, prohibited federal agencies from using state funding to carry out data collection without proper warrants, and eliminated numerous gray areas not mentioned in the Fourth Amendment. It was intended to go into effect on January 1, 2015. [30] However, this bill did not pass.

Federal Level

On June 2, 2015, President Barack Obama signed a revised version of the USA Freedom Act. Under Section 215 the mass collection of phone data was no longer allowed. Phone records could now only be obtained through the Federal Courts. [31] Companies also now had the ability to publicly report the number of records requests they had received, making it even harder for massive amounts of information to be requested. [32] This was the first time such protections were added for citizens since the attacks on September 11, 2001. Many Americans had concerns after Snowden's information leaks, causing data privacy and security concerns to become much larger and widely discussed issues. Still, others in government, such as Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, were pushing for more terrorism protections and would realize that this bill, while losing some ground on their end, was still their best chance, as protections granted from the previous bill had already expired. [33]

Even as the Government was adding privacy protections, the advancements in technology were making surveillance practices easier. Devices such as satellites, cell phones, smart cars, smart-grid power reading, smart televisions, drones and automatic license place readers, to name a few, were becoming more and more prevalent in the surveillance world and the ways that information is gathered. New technology such as stingray surveillance technology is now used to create a more prominent signal for devices to gain connectivity to the internet, or cell phone towers, which, in turn, grants access to the information stored on connected devices. These types of devices have been used by many law enforcement agencies, growing the public's concern, and need for more privacy protection laws. [34]

Two large technology companies, Microsoft and Apple, were involved in litigation with the US Government in 2016 on the basis of protecting the privacy of their consumers. In February 2016 Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft, filed a lawsuit against the US Government for breaking the US Constitution by not allowing Microsoft to "inform their customers when federal agencies sought their information." [35] Apple was involved in court proceedings in relations to a cell phone connected to a mass shooting in December 2015. The FBI was requesting that they unlock an encrypted cell phone so that they could gain access to the phone. This would have required Apple to write new software to bypass the password encryption on the phone. Apple felt that by doing this for this case, they would be opening this up for future cases, and removing the security of the password on the cell phones. [36]

The Supreme Court was involved in another case involving a string of robberies throughout Michigan and Ohio. A self-confessed robber in the case, gave the name and cell phone number of Timothy Carpenter to FBI agents, stating that he was involved. The FBI was able to use the location records of Timothy's cell phone to place him near the crimes, of which he was later convicted of aiding and abetting. His attorneys had argued that the cell phone records were not legally able to be used as evidence, due to lack of search warrant. However, the court had ruled that the cell phone data was not protected. After appeals, the final ruling was that "the records in this case fall on the unprotected side of the Fourth Amendment." Chief Justice John Roberts was later quoted as saying, "[...]some of the courts most challenging cases involve applying long held rules created by the courts to quickly developing technology." [37]

S. 139 was introduced on January 12, 2017, sponsored by Senator Orrin G. Hatch. [38] The bill will continue Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that allows the NSA and FBI to further continue warrantless access to personal social media and conversation activities of foreigners to America, that also involves U.S citizens' private communications, for an additional six years. [39] The S. 139 bill has made minor key changes to potentially enhance more effective ways to protect privacy in the United States while still tracking possible terrorist attacks. A few changes will now require the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to approve specified query procedures every year, as well as have the Inspector General of the Department of Justice overlook the query procedures and practices of the FBI, and have limited use of Section 702 to not allow information found to be used against U.S citizens for criminal cases. Section 702 originally expired on December 31, 2017 but was then continued until January 19, 2018 where the vote ruled in favor of the extension by 256–164. President Donald Trump signed to enact S. 139 which became Public Law No: 115-118 that same day. [40] [41] On November 29, 2017 H.R. 4478 FISA Reauthorization Act of 2017, was introduced, sponsored by Republican Devin Nunes to extend Section 702. [42] Representatives Justin Amish and Zoe Lofgren offered the USA Rights Act, pertaining a more balanced scale between security and liberty as this bill protects the 4th amendment along with eliminating the warrantless backdoor searches, that would then require government officials to obtain warrants in order to seize and view American citizens' data when the NSA and FBI tack into foreigner activities seeking any relations to terrorism. [43] [44] [45] The bill resulted as a loss by a vote of 183–233. [46]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court</span> U.S. federal court

The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), also called the FISA Court, is a U.S. federal court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to oversee requests for surveillance warrants against foreign spies inside the United States by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1791 amendment prohibiting unreasonable searches and seizures

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. It prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and sets requirements for issuing warrants: warrants must be issued by a judge or magistrate, justified by probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and must particularly describe the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

Wiretapping, also known as wire tapping or telephone tapping, is the monitoring of telephone and Internet-based conversations by a third party, often by covert means. The wire tap received its name because, historically, the monitoring connection was an actual electrical tap on an analog telephone or telegraph line. Legal wiretapping by a government agency is also called lawful interception. Passive wiretapping monitors or records the traffic, while active wiretapping alters or otherwise affects it.

A pen register, or dialed number recorder (DNR), is a device that records all numbers called from a particular telephone line. The term has come to include any device or program that performs similar functions to an original pen register, including programs monitoring Internet communications.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act</span> 1978 United States federal law

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 is a United States federal law that establishes procedures for the surveillance and collection of foreign intelligence on domestic soil.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">NSA warrantless surveillance (2001–2007)</span> Part of Terrorist Surveillance Program

NSA warrantless surveillance — also commonly referred to as "warrantless-wiretapping" or "-wiretaps" — was the surveillance of persons within the United States, including U.S. citizens, during the collection of notionally foreign intelligence by the National Security Agency (NSA) as part of the Terrorist Surveillance Program. In late 2001, the NSA was authorized to monitor, without obtaining a FISA warrant, phone calls, Internet activities, text messages and other forms of communication involving any party believed by the NSA to be outside the U.S., even if the other end of the communication lies within the U.S.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Terrorist Surveillance Program</span> NSA program

The Terrorist Surveillance Program was an electronic surveillance program implemented by the National Security Agency (NSA) of the United States in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks. It was part of the President's Surveillance Program, which was in turn conducted under the overall umbrella of the War on Terrorism. The NSA, a signals intelligence agency, implemented the program to intercept al Qaeda communications overseas where at least one party is not a U.S. person. In 2005, The New York Times disclosed that technical glitches resulted in some of the intercepts including communications which were "purely domestic" in nature, igniting the NSA warrantless surveillance controversy. Later works, such as James Bamford's The Shadow Factory, described how the nature of the domestic surveillance was much, much more widespread than initially disclosed. In a 2011 New Yorker article, former NSA employee Bill Binney said that his colleagues told him that the NSA had begun storing billing and phone records from "everyone in the country."

The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) is an independent agency within the executive branch of the United States government, established by Congress in 2004 to advise the President and other senior executive branch officials to ensure that concerns with respect to privacy and civil liberties in the United States are appropriately considered in the development and implementation of all laws, regulations, and executive branch policies related to terrorism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">MAINWAY</span> NSA database of US telephone calls

MAINWAY is a database maintained by the United States' National Security Agency (NSA) containing metadata for hundreds of billions of telephone calls made through the largest telephone carriers in the United States, including AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile.

Warrantless searches are searches and seizures conducted without court-issued search warrants.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Protect America Act of 2007</span> US surveillance law

The Protect America Act of 2007 (PAA),, is a controversial amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that was signed into law by U.S. President George W. Bush on August 5, 2007. It removed the warrant requirement for government surveillance of foreign intelligence targets "reasonably believed" to be outside the United States. The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 reauthorized many provisions of the Protect America Act in Title VII of FISA.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">FISA of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008</span> United States Law

The FISA Amendments Act of 2008, also called the FAA and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008, is an Act of Congress that amended the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It has been used as the legal basis for surveillance programs disclosed by Edward Snowden in 2013, including PRISM.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">USA Freedom Act</span> 2015 U.S. surveillance law

The USA Freedom Act is a U.S. law enacted on June 2, 2015, that restored and modified several provisions of the Patriot Act, which had expired the day before. The act imposes some new limits on the bulk collection of telecommunication metadata on U.S. citizens by American intelligence agencies, including the National Security Agency. It also restores authorization for roving wiretaps and tracking lone wolf terrorists. The title of the act is a ten-letter backronym that stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and Ensuring Effective Discipline Over Monitoring Act of 2015.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">FISA Improvements Act</span>

The FISA Improvements Act is a proposed act by Senator Dianne Feinstein, Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Prompted by the disclosure of NSA surveillance by Edward Snowden, it would establish the surveillance program as legal, but impose some limitations on availability of the data. Opponents say the bill would codify warrantless access to many communications of American citizens for use by domestic law enforcement.

The Arizona Fourth Amendment Protection Act is a bill proposed in the Arizona legislature that would withdraw state support for collection of metadata and ban the use of warrantless data in courts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Proposed reforms of mass surveillance by the United States</span>

Proposed reforms of mass surveillance by the United States are a collection of diverse proposals offered in response to the Global surveillance disclosures of 2013.

<i>Klayman v. Obama</i> American federal court case

Klayman v. Obama, 957 F.Supp.2d 1, was a decision by the United States District Court for District of Columbia finding that the National Security Agency's (NSA) bulk phone metadata collection program was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment. The ruling was later overturned on jurisdictional grounds, leaving the constitutional implications of NSA surveillance unaddressed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Barack Obama on mass surveillance</span> Overview of the statements of former U.S. president Barack Obama on mass surveillance

Former U.S. President Barack Obama favored some levels of mass surveillance. He has received some widespread criticism from detractors as a result. Due to his support of certain government surveillance, some critics have said his support violated acceptable privacy rights, while others dispute or attempt to provide justification for the expansion of surveillance initiatives under his administration.

<i>American Civil Liberties Union v. Clapper</i> American federal court case

American Civil Liberties Union v. Clapper, 785 F.3d 787, was a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and its affiliate, the New York Civil Liberties Union, against the United States federal government as represented by then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. The ACLU challenged the legality and constitutionality of the National Security Agency's (NSA) bulk phone metadata collection program.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Litigation over global surveillance</span>

Litigation over global surveillance has occurred in multiple jurisdictions since the global surveillance disclosures of 2013.

References

  1. ↑ "Four models of fourth amendment protection". Stan. L. Rev.
  2. ↑ Vijayan, Jaikumar (2014-01-07), California lawmakers move to bar state help to NSA, Computer World, The Utah bill aims to prohibit state and local agencies from providing water to a giant new NSA data center near Salt Lake City.
  3. ↑ "USA PATRIOT Act 2001". www.govinfo.gov. Archived from the original on 2018-02-05. Retrieved 2018-02-03.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  4. ↑ Rubel, Alan (2007). "Privacy and the U.S.A. Patriot Act: Rights, the Value of Rights, and Autonomy". Law and Philosophy. 26 (2): 119–159. doi:10.1007/s10982-005-5970-x. S2CID   143521752. ProQuest   43185160 – via ProQuest.
  5. ↑ Sanger, David E.; O'Neil, John (2006). "White House Begins New Effort to Defend Surveillance Program". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  6. ↑ Lichtblau, Eric; Risen, James (2009-07-10). "U.S. Wiretapping of Limited Value, Officials Report". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  7. ↑ "USATODAY.com - NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls". usatoday30.usatoday.com. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  8. ↑ "NSA datamining pushes tech envelope" . Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  9. ↑ Mayer, Jane (2011-05-16). "Thomas Drake vs. the N.S.A." The New Yorker. ISSN   0028-792X . Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  10. ↑ Shorrock, Tim (2013-03-26). "Obama's Crackdown on Whistleblowers". The Nation. ISSN   0027-8378 . Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  11. ↑ Risen, James; Lichtblau, Eric (2005-12-16). "Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  12. ↑ Risen, James; Lichtblau, Eric (2005-12-21). "Spying Program Snared U.S. Calls". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  13. ↑ Lichtblau, Eric; Risen, James (2009-04-15). "Officials Say U.S. Wiretaps Exceeded Law". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  14. ↑ Greenwald, Glenn; Ackerman, Spencer (2013-06-27). "NSA collected Americans' email records in bulk for two years under Obama". the Guardian. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  15. ↑ Gellman, Barton; Soltani, Ashkan (2013-10-30). "NSA infiltrates links to Yahoo, Google data centers worldwide, Snowden documents say". Washington Post. ISSN   0190-8286 . Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  16. ↑ Greenwald, Glenn; MacAskill, Ewen (2013-06-07). "NSA Prism program taps in to user data of Apple, Google and others". the Guardian. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  17. ↑ "NSA slides explain the PRISM data-collection programwebsite=The Washington Post". The Washington Post . 10 July 2013. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  18. ↑ Greenwald, Glenn (2013-06-06). "NSA collecting phone records of millions of Verizon customers daily". the Guardian. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  19. ↑ Greenwald, Glenn (2013-07-31). "XKeyscore: NSA tool collects 'nearly everything a user does on the internet'". the Guardian. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  20. ↑ "World of Spycraft: NSA and CIA Spied in Online Games — ProPublica". ProPublica. Justin Elliott. 2013-12-09. Retrieved 2018-02-03.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  21. ↑ "NSA spied on World of Warcraft, Xbox Live, and Second Life gamers". PCWorld. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  22. ↑ Tye, John (2014-07-08). "How a Reagan order set the NSA loose". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  23. ↑ "Executive Orders". National Archives. 2016-08-15. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  24. ↑ Vijayan, Jaikumar (2014-01-07). "California lawmakers move to bar state help to NSA". CSO. Retrieved 2018-02-05.
  25. ↑ "Bill Text - SB-828 Assistance to federal agencies". leginfo.legislature.ca.gov. Retrieved 2018-02-05.
  26. ↑ "SB-828 Assistance to federal agencies.(2013-2014)". leginfo.legislature.ca.gov. Retrieved 2018-02-05.
  27. ↑ "HB 1193 - 2017-18". Washington State Legislature. Retrieved 2018-02-04.
  28. ↑ Maharrey, Michael (2017-01-14). "Washington State Bill Would End Support of Warrantless Federal Spying Programs". OffNow. Retrieved 2018-02-04.
  29. ↑ "Washington State Legislature". app.leg.wa.gov. Retrieved 2018-02-04.
  30. ↑ title 41, chapter 9 by adding article 10; see bill text and other data on SB1156 Archived 2016-03-04 at the Wayback Machine at the Arizona legislature website.
  31. ↑ "Senate approves USA Freedom Act". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  32. ↑ "6 things to know about the newly approved USA Freedom Act". PBS NewsHour. 3 June 2015. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  33. ↑ Diamond, Jeremy. "Senate passes NSA reform measure". CNN Politics. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  34. ↑ Claypoole, Ted (Nov 2016). "Smarter Devices = More Vulnerability to Government and Criminals". Computer and Internet Lawyer. 33: 1–5 – via EBSCO.
  35. ↑ "Bill Gates Calls For Tougher Limits On Government Snooping". Huffington Post. Reuters. 2016-04-19. Retrieved 2018-02-04.
  36. ↑ "Breaking Down Apple's iPhone Fight With the U.S. Government". The New York Times. 2016-03-03. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2018-02-04.
  37. ↑ de Vogue, Ariane. "Supreme Court takes on major Fourth Amendment case". CNN. Retrieved 2018-02-04.
  38. ↑ Orrin, Hatch (2018-01-19). "Text - S.139 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): An Act to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to improve foreign intelligence collection and the safeguards, accountability, and oversight of acquisitions of foreign intelligence, to extend title VII of such Act, and for other purposes". www.congress.gov. Retrieved 2018-02-07.
  39. ↑ "FISA Section 702 | U.S. House of Representatives". intelligence.house.gov. Retrieved 2018-02-06.
  40. ↑ 115th Congress (2017) (January 12, 2017). "S. 139 (115th)". Legislation. GovTrack.us. Retrieved February 6, 2018. An Act to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to improve foreign intelligence ...{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  41. ↑ "Statement by the President on FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act of 2017". whitehouse.gov . Retrieved 2018-02-07– via National Archives.
  42. ↑ Devin, Nunes (2017-12-19). "H.R.4478 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act of 2017". www.congress.gov. Retrieved 2018-02-07.
  43. ↑ Zoe, Lofgren (2017-11-14). "Actions - H.R.4124 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): USA RIGHTS Act". www.congress.gov. Retrieved 2018-02-07.
  44. ↑ "Bipartisan Coalition Introduces USA RIGHTS Act to Reform Secretive Warrantless Spy Program". U.S. Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren. 2017-10-24. Retrieved 2018-02-06.
  45. ↑ Ackerman, Spencer; Ball, James (2013-08-09). "NSA loophole allows warrantless search for US citizens' emails and phone calls". the Guardian. Retrieved 2018-02-07.
  46. ↑ Kelly, Erin (2018-01-11). "House votes to renew surveillance law that may collect Americans' emails without warrants". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2018-02-06.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.