Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
42. The text of Leahy's reform bill:
Wed Jul 31, 2013, 05:47 PM
Jul 2013
The FISA Accountability and Privacy Protection Act of 2013

June 26, 2013

For Background Purposes

Public revelations about two classified data collection programs have brought renewed attention to the powerful Government surveillance authorities contained in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), particularly the impact on law-abiding Americans of provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act and the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. The Director of National Intelligence has acknowledged that they are being conducted pursuant to Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT and Section 702 of FISA. The FISA Accountability and Privacy Protection Act of 2013 will improve the privacy protections and accountability provisions associated with these authorities, and also strengthen oversight and transparency with regard to other provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act. Summarized below are some of the highlights of the bill’s provisions:

New and Shorter Sunset Provisions to Ensure Proper Oversight

  • Shortens the sunset for the FISA Amendments Act from December 2017 to June 2015. The June 2015 sunset would align with expiring USA PATRIOT Act provisions, and enable Congress to address these FISA provisions all at once, instead of in a piecemeal fashion.

  • Adds new June 2015 sunsets on statutes authorizing use of National Security Letters (NSLs).

Higher Standards for PATRIOT Act Surveillance Authorities

  • Elevates the threshold standard for obtaining records through Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act by requiring the government to show relevance to an authorized investigation and a link to one of three categories of a foreign agent, power, or group.

  • Requires that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court approve minimization procedures for data collected under Section 215.

  • Requires the government to provide a statement of the facts and circumstances to justify its belief that the Section 215 records for tangible things, or Pen Register and Trap and Trace Devices (PR/TT) sought are relevant to an authorized investigation to obtain foreign intelligence information.

  • Strikes the one-year waiting period before a recipient can challenge a nondisclosure order for Section 215 orders and strikes the conclusive presumption in favor of the government on nondisclosure.

  • Requires the FBI to retain an internal statement of facts demonstrating the relevance of information sought to its investigation before it can issue a National Security Letter (NSL).

  • For “roving” wiretaps, requires law enforcement to identify “with particularity” the target of a wiretap request under FISA.

Increased Transparency and Public Reporting

  • Expands public reporting on the use of National Security Letters and authorities under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, including an unclassified report on the impact of the use of these authorities on the privacy of United States persons.

  • Fixes a constitutional deficiency found by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Doe v. Mukasey by shifting the burden to the government to seek a court order for an NSL non-disclosure order, and allows the recipient of such a non-disclosure order to challenge it at any time.

Increased Judicial Review and Inspector General Oversight

  • Requires Inspector General audits on the use of Section 215 orders, NSLs, and other surveillance authorities under the USA PATRIOT Act.

  • Provides for a comprehensive review of FISA Amendments Act (Section 702) surveillance by the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community (IC IG).

  • Clarifies the scope of the annual reviews for Section 702 currently required by the law, in order to cover all agencies that have targeting or minimization procedures approved by the FISA Court.
http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/the-fisa-accountability-and-privacy-protection-act-of-2013


The co-sponsors include Senators Richard Blumenthal, Jon Tester, Mark Udall and Ron Wyden.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

A Reasonable And Nuanced Statement, Ma'am The Magistrate Jul 2013 #1
Yes. n/t ProSense Jul 2013 #2
"This bulk collection program has massive privacy implications." NoOneMan Jul 2013 #3
You Make A Pane Of Glass Look Like A Slab Of Slate, Sir The Magistrate Jul 2013 #4
Everyone's gotta be good at something NoOneMan Jul 2013 #5
Dunno, Sir: Seen Plenty Weren't Good At, Or For, A Damn Thing The Magistrate Jul 2013 #8
LOL! n/t ProSense Jul 2013 #7
actually, Pat Leahy's statement in whole, dear sir, is cali Jul 2013 #24
And You Believe Me Unable To Comprehend English, Ma'am, Because...? The Magistrate Jul 2013 #27
I, sir, would never suggest any such thing. You did, however cali Jul 2013 #30
Wheels Within The Wheels Within The Wheels Have Never Been Your Strong Suit, Ma'am The Magistrate Jul 2013 #32
oh, I don't know about that, dear sir. cali Jul 2013 #33
"Hypocrisy Is The Tribute Vice Pays To Virtue" The Magistrate Jul 2013 #34
Is the "dear sir" shtick a play on Dear Leader? Or is it simply DevonRex Aug 2013 #47
if you wanted to know you could simply have asked. cali Aug 2013 #48
You're welcome. I ProSense Jul 2013 #6
He may not condone the way it was disclosed, but if it hadn't been the "discussion" wouldn't Tierra_y_Libertad Jul 2013 #9
Funny how that is what the OP chose to highlight... SomethingFishy Jul 2013 #11
"Funny"? Did chosing to "highlight" that point prevent you from reading the entire statement? ProSense Jul 2013 #12
Yes I am terribly upset.. SomethingFishy Jul 2013 #14
Yes, we're all free, and you chose to be upset because I "highlighted" text. ProSense Jul 2013 #16
Yes I'm terribly "upset"... SomethingFishy Jul 2013 #20
We all have opinions. Complaining about "highlighted" text seems silly. n/t ProSense Jul 2013 #21
Yes I bet it does. SomethingFishy Jul 2013 #23
It's not ProSense Jul 2013 #25
Thanks for posting this. Sanity from Leahy. nt msanthrope Jul 2013 #10
Leahy is contained RobertEarl Jul 2013 #13
"Trolls on DU act much the same s those who have obstructed Leahy." ProSense Jul 2013 #18
Alert? Not my game plan RobertEarl Jul 2013 #37
Ah, you're a self-admitted "troll" hunter. ProSense Jul 2013 #39
Mission? RobertEarl Jul 2013 #40
Wait ProSense Jul 2013 #41
Changed my mind RobertEarl Aug 2013 #50
And By Trolls, Sir, You Mean People You Disagree With And Do Not Like? The Magistrate Jul 2013 #19
Leahy is very critical in that statement. that he's polite, doesn't blunt that cali Jul 2013 #26
"we need to examine how to prevent this type of breach in the future." Zorra Jul 2013 #15
That's some really big type, but ProSense Jul 2013 #22
Well, since the crux of your beef with Snowden is that he didn't use official channels NuclearDem Jul 2013 #29
Actually, ProSense Jul 2013 #31
Breaking the Law to Defend Democracy William deB. Mills Aug 2013 #45
K&R BumRushDaShow Jul 2013 #17
we'll see. Leahy's been introducing legislation to do just that for a decade now cali Jul 2013 #28
I doubt he and most of the rest of them BumRushDaShow Jul 2013 #35
no, but he has staff and access to experts cali Jul 2013 #36
Yup. That's what usually happens. nt BumRushDaShow Jul 2013 #38
The text of Leahy's reform bill: ProSense Jul 2013 #42
Abuse of Power William deB. Mills Aug 2013 #43
Franken has been openly supportive of NSA activities despite recent revelations cali Aug 2013 #44
Where Does Senator Franken Stand on NSA Domestic Spying? William deB. Mills Aug 2013 #46
K & R Scurrilous Aug 2013 #49
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Statement of Senator Patr...»Reply #42