The FISA bill being introduced today in the House is GOOD legislation.

[cali]

That's right. It's not the giveaway that we've been told it is.

Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) introduced the RESTORE Act, the Responsible Electronic Surveillance that is Overseen, Reviewed, and Effective Act of 2007. Here are the key provisions:

* Restores court oversight of intelligence by requiring that electronic surveillance programs be approved by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court

* Mandates that FISA warrants be obtained when the administration wants to undertake surveillance of persons in the US

* No retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that cooperated with the administration’s warrantless surveillance

* Does not require individual warrants when targets are reasonably believed to be abroad

* Ensures FISA is the exclusive means of electronic surveillance and that no modifications can be made without express legal authorization

A summary of the RESTORE Act can be found here. The bill also requires the Justice Department to reveal the details of all electronic surveillance conducted without court orders since 9/11.

UPDATE: Pontificator writes: “Yesterday’s New York Times article on the FISA bill had a misleading title and could easily be misinterpreted if it is not read closely. It implied that the House FISA bill, introduced today, is a capitulation.

It is not. It is a strong bill that protects civil liberties and provides for oversight.”


http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/09/house-introduces-new-fisa-legislation

[Fredda Weinberg]

1. Row, row, row your boat. Row against the meme ...

Thank you for posting this.

[cali]

2. I'm ashamed to admit that

I helped perpetuate that meme. I'm just trying to make amends.

[truebrit71]

13. I initially thought it was more caving and backing-down from the Dems too...

...glad it isn't...

[robinlynne]

3. when introduced by Conyers, you know it is good.

[still_one]

4. So correct me if I am wrong, but isn't FISA still in effect, and why aren't

the violations of FISA that occurred by the bush administration being pursued?

[cali]

7. They are being pursued.

Both in the House and the Senate, and indeed, in this legislation.

[still_one]

9. I wasn't critisizing the Restore legislation, just wondering what happend. Thanks /nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

5. But if it is something that Bush would sign it must be a bad bill, right?

:sarcasm:

[rockymountaindem]

6. Aww man... I was getting all ready to bust out the word "corporatist" all over the place

Although I too must admit I was pretty dismayed by the posts last night, so I'll have to revise my opinions. And read more closely next time...

[asjr]

15. i was really pissed off yesterday

about it and wrote before I thought. I forgot that a lot of the "news" we get are fairy tales.

[rockymountaindem]

18. Me too n.t

[Deep13]

8. Sounds good.

Based on this, it seems to be in compliance with the 4th Amendment.

[Kagemusha]

10. The bill has a big flaw, as I said on other threads shortly ago.

It has warrants for GROUPS. Not individuals. GROUPS. Blanket, umbrella warrants of a wholly unconstitutional nature that are a rubber stamp for the unrestricted surveillance of anyone the government deems to be part of those groups, at that moment and in the future. Note that legitimate foreign targets require NO warrant, so we're talking about what the law calls "US persons", citizens and residents of the United States. And the law, last I heard, requires only that these groups be of interest to a foreign intelligence investigation. Not targets. Just of "interest".

THAT part of the bill is wrong, and THAT part of the bill needs to be changed. By someone. Anyone. It is wrong, it is unconstitutional, and worse, it is a mistake.

[cali]

11. You're right.

Thanks for posting that. From the ACLU

What follows is an explanation of why we oppose the year-long program
warrants in the bill.

_Baskets, Buckets, and Blankets? What's wrong with these so-called
"warrants"?_

Called baskets, buckets or blankets, the new warrants created by the
Protect America Act, and maintained in some form by the RESTORE Act
(Conyers/ Reyes) are most commonly known as "program" or "general"
warrants that have been held unconstitutional for violating the Fourth
Amendment. They may have a new name this go-around, but they are the
same program warrants believed to be used the in the President's illegal
spying program after 9/11 and codified in the FISA modernization bill
introduced by Rep. Wilson that Democrats opposed in the 109^th Congress.

· The Fourth Amendment has several requirements before a search or
seizure is constitutional -- that a judge is involved, that there is
probable cause, that the search or seizure is reasonable and most
important for this discussion -- the things searched or seized have to
be stated with particularity.

<snip>

[Kagemusha]

19. The ACLU is gonna have a big uphill battle on this one.

They were shut out of the drafting to hurt them and stop them from getting this critical word out quickly.

At the start of every discussion about blanket warrants should be how many of them have been issued in the history of the Republic. Answer: Zero. And one might ask why.

[MrMickeysMom]

14. But aren't the groups in question those contacting each other outside the US?

That was my first impression, anyway.

[Kagemusha]

17. Nope!

If they're foreign groups talking to each other on foreign soil, no warrant is needed.

I know they're bouncing around a claim as fact that the FISA court ruled that a warrant was needed in order to do the intercepts the lazy way - just grab them off US fibre-optics routing foreign to foreign calls - but first of all, that doesn't even seem consistent with the original FISA law and sounds dubious, second, we haven't seen the court say that - we've only been told it's said that in a secret ruling, and third, that's an easily fixed issue that I thought was already fixed.

So what we're discussing is group warrants on "US persons" (citizens and residents). Because otherwise they'd just amend the law to say what the FISA law intended - no warrants for foreign-to-foreign - and we wouldn't be talking about warrants at all.

But we are, and that's because we're discussing Congress passing a law to introduce a Stalinist surveillance regime by which US people can be spied upon in an unlimited manner as long as they are members of a group designated by the government and rubber stamped by a court as being, not a target, but of some tangential relation ("of interest") to a foreign intel investigation. That's a loophole large enough to float the Exxon Valdez through it. Coming soon from your Democratic majority.

[MrMickeysMom]

20. Hai, Kagemusha...

Gomen nasai...

(okay, I'm reading Shogun)

Time to do some homework and telephoning!

[Kagemusha]

22. It's ok, I'm just trying to inform everyone. I hope the bill gets better.

But if no one knows about the big flaw nothing can begin, so to speak. (nani mo hajimaranai :)

I'm glad the ACLU is spreading the word too. Because yeah, this bill does have a lot of good things.

[radfringe]

12. yes it's good - but before we start throwing confetti

let us see what it ends up being after amendments are added, the senate-house committees finish resolving the different versions...

that's assuming it passes in both the senate and the house.

and then there's bush to consider - will he sign it and gut it with signing statements, or do an outright veto? if he vetoes it, are the votes there for an override?

[MrMickeysMom]

16. How about this part? -

..."The bill is silent on retroactive immunity because the Administration has refused to provide Congress with documents on the specifics of the President’s warrantless surveillance program. However, the bill does provide prospective immunity for those complying with court orders issued pursuant to this authority..."

Whatever legislation is introduced, we'll always be dealing with the silence of these criminals in the White House.

[annabanana]

21. " prospective" immunity

If and when all the papers are turned over..

I can live with that.