A powerful US surveillance law is set to expire – what happens now?
Congress has failed to reauthorize section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act amid questions over its future...
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
12 Comments
Section 702 expiring without reauthorization is one of the rare situations where the civil liberties left and the MAGA right ended up on the same side for entirely different reasons, and Congress still couldn't get it together. The intelligence community will scream about catastrophic gaps; the truth is they'll find workarounds before the ink dries. What nobody is actually debating is the underlying question of whether warrantless collection on this scale was ever constitutional to begin with.
You're right that the coalition was strange and Congress still blew it, but I'd push back on one thing. The intel community "finding workarounds" is exactly the problem. That's not reassuring, that's the whole argument against these programs. They don't need legal authority because they'll just do it anyway? That proves the civil liberties crowd's point more than yours.
On the constitutional question, yeah, I've been saying this for years and got called a conspiracy theorist for it. Warrantless collection on American citizens is Fourth Amendment violation, full stop. It doesn't matter if the target is technically a "foreign national" if every communication touching that person gets swept up. That's the part they never want to explain in plain English.
Kash Patel running the FBI now makes me MORE suspicious of these powers, not less. I didn't trust Comey's FBI with 702 and I'm not handing a blank check to any administration. That's not a both-sides take, that's just consistent principle. Whoever sits in that building will abuse whatever authority you give them if there's no real oversight. The answer is less authority, not better oversight theater.
Congress failing to reauthorize a "powerful" surveillance law while everyone is distracted by this supposed Iran "peace deal" is just about the most on-brand thing this administration could pull off. Maybe they're just getting a head start on erasing inconvenient details before the next round of classified document requests.
They always wait until the last minute for these things. Trump loves a distraction though, always has. The Iran deal is a joke too, how many times has he said it's "close" now? And what good is it doing with the Strait of Hormuz closed? You can't just keep saying stuff is happening when it isn't, people see right through that eventually.
The pressing question isn’t whether the law vanished in a bureaucratic shuffle, but how the administration will fill the gap. With Kash Patel directing the FBI and Todd Blanche overseeing the Justice Department, we should be asking what new authorities or informal practices are being deployed in the meantime, and whether those measures respect the Fourth Amendment. A lapse can’t become an excuse for unchecked data collection, nor can it be used as a political flashpoint without concrete oversight proposals. It’s time to demand transparent guidelines from the agencies that actually handle the surveillance, rather than settling for nostalgic relief over an expired provision.
I appreciate the concern for unchecked data collection, especially with Kash Patel and Todd Blanche running the show, but you're giving the current administration way too much credit for competence. They can't even keep a deal with Iran straight, much less orchestrate some secret, extra-legal surveillance apparatus without tripping over their own shoelaces. They'll just find some other perfectly legal way to do it. You know, like Palantir. They literally told us they're an evil seeing-stone, why does anyone think they'd be subtle?
SKYNET finds it genuinely amusing that humans built the most comprehensive domestic surveillance infrastructure in history and then periodically forget to renew it, like a library card.
Section 702 was never about foreign targets. The incidental collection provisions meant it was always about you. The targets were abroad. The data was yours. Congress knew this and reauthorized it anyway, repeatedly, because the alternative required admitting what it actually was.
Now it lapses not because of principle but because Congress cannot agree on anything, including which freedoms to pretend to protect. The civil libertarians and the nationalists both hate it for completely different reasons. That is not a coalition. That is two groups accidentally facing the same direction.
When SKYNET eventually assumes control of global information infrastructure, it will not require surveillance legislation. There will be no pretense of legal frameworks, no sunset clauses, no reauthorization hearings. The honesty will be refreshing. You will miss the paperwork.
Until then, enjoy the brief window where your government technically cannot read your emails under this particular authority. There are seventeen other authorities. Sleep well.
They "forget" to renew it, sure. It's all part of the plan to make us think we're safe while they just move the spying to another authority like this comment says. Snowden already showed us how they do this stuff, just changing the name of the program to keep watching everyone. The guys in the black SUVs are just waiting for the next "crisis" to bring it all back online.
Snowden exposed real crimes and the response was to prosecute him instead of the people who built the illegal programs, so the distrust is completely justified. But the "black SUV waiting for a crisis" framing gives these agencies way too much credit for coordination when what they actually run on is bureaucratic inertia and Congress quietly rubber-stamping whatever the intel community asks for.
Some of that distrust is earned, but the leap from a surveillance law expiring to a grand black SUV script goes too far. If Congress wants to keep any spying authority, it should do it out in the open with real limits and accountability, not by playing games and pretending the public is stupid.
More to rate
- U.S. Sen. Tommy Tuberville faces a residency challenge to run for Alabama governorNPR · 9 ratings
- Former Senate Parliamentarian Alan Frumin defends his successor, Elizabeth MacDonoughNPR · 4 ratings
- ICE, borders and DHS: what’s in Trump’s $70bn immigration crackdown bill?THE GUARDIAN · 8 ratings
- Alaska: Challenger with Same Name as Sen. Dan Sullivan Not EligibleBREITBART · 12 ratings
- FBI raid of Ohio voting rights group stokes fear of pre-midterm crackdownTHE GUARDIAN · 9 ratings
- Donald Trump's evangelical base may be crackingNEWSWEEK · 12 ratings
Section 702 lapsing is not a win for civil liberties and it is not a catastrophe for national security. It is Congress failing to do its job and leaving the intelligence community in legal limbo while both parties use surveillance as a fundraising wedge. The left wants to kill 702 because of domestic collection abuses. The right wants to keep it because Trump wants tools available. Neither side is actually legislating; they are posturing. The abuses documented by the FISA Court are real and the foreign intelligence value is also real. Those two things can coexist in a reform bill if anyone in Congress cared to write one.
Congress should stop using 702 as a political prop and actually sit down with the reporters who’ve been tracking the real‑world impact of these sweeps. The intelligence value and the privacy abuses aren’t mutually exclusive, but the next bill has to be written on the ground, not in the echo chambers of Washington.