![](\"https:\/\/tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com\/2016\/08\/gettyimages-96263974.jpg?w=738\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
In a Senate Select Intelligence Committee<\/a> hearing that often veered off route, two of the nation\u2019s most powerful intelligence figures made their case for extending a controversial portion of the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act (FISA) known as Section 702<\/a>. Section 702, which allows the government to intercept the communications of foreign intelligence targets, is set to expire on December 31 unless it is reauthorized by Congress.<\/p>\n NSA Director Michael Rogers broke down two scenarios in which the core controversy, namely the incidental violation of the right to privacy for U.S. citizens, comes up. He claimed that in 90 percent of cases, that form of collection is a result of two foreign targets who talk about a third person who is in the U.S. As Rogers tells it, 10 percent of the time a foreign target ends up talking to an American citizen. Because American citizens have Fourth Amendment rights, running into Americans in the course of foreign surveillance creates the sticky situation known as incidental collection, a major focus<\/a> for privacy advocates seeking reform.<\/p>\n In the course of justifying Section 702 as an invaluable tool for counterterrorism and counterproliferation efforts, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats claimed that agencies have made \u201cherculean\u201d efforts to get a count on how many Americans have been affected, but in spite of those efforts it remains impossible. He went on to undermine his argument by implying that it probably would be possible, but that he chooses not to allocate resources to the task when the intelligence community could be focusing on imminent concerns in countries like Iran and North Korea. \u201cI can\u2019t justify such a diversion of critical resources,\u201d Coats said.<\/p>\n He went on to note that without Section 702, intelligence agencies would have to obtain a court order issued due to probable cause \u2014 ostensibly the bar that needs to be cleared in order to surveil U.S. citizens. \u201cThat\u2019s a relatively higher threshold than we require to foreign intelligence information,\u201d Coats said, noting that he\u2019d prefer not to need to clear the Fourth Amendment bar when investigating foreign targets.<\/p>\n In a broad appeal on 702\u2019s utility, Rogers went so far as to claim that 702 \u201c[created] insights on the Russian involvement in 2016 election,\u201d providing intelligence that would otherwise not have been possible.<\/p>\n On Tuesday, Senate Republicans introduced a bill<\/a> that would make Section 702 permanent rather than a program that requires regular review and sunsets after a predetermined period of time. \u00a0\u201cWe can\u2019t handcuff our national-security officials when they\u2019re fighting against such a vicious enemy,\u201d Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton said in defense of the bill. A day later, President Trump\u2019s Homeland Security Advisor Tom Bossert penned an editorial for The New York Times<\/a> throwing the White House\u2019s support behind efforts to reinstate Section 702 permanently.<\/p>\n Oregon Senator Ron Wyden has called for answers on how many Americans have been swept up by Section 702 just about every chance he gets. In today\u2019s hearing, he again pressed the intelligence leads to clarify how the intelligence community is working to identify the scope of Section 702\u2019s incidental collection concerns.<\/p>\n Following the hearing, Wyden issued the following statement:<\/p>\n \u201cWhat the director said today is in my view a 180-degree retreat from what he said earlier and what his predecessor said earlier. It reflects a misunderstanding of what this is about. You can\u2019t say that there\u2019s no impact from sweeping up law-abiding Americans\u2019 communications under this program, and then complain that counting the number of those calls and emails would violate their privacy. That just doesn\u2019t pass the smell test. I won\u2019t stop pushing for real transparency about this end-run around the Fourth Amendment.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n While the hearing was explicitly intended to focus on FISA, its timing \u2014 a day before former FBI Director James Comey will testify for the first time since his firing \u2014 led Senators to frequently derail conversation around the intended topic. Seizing the opportunity, Senators from both sides of the aisle pressed the intelligence chiefs about reports that President Trump had approached them in order to influence the ongoing investigation into Russia\u2019s interference in the 2016 presidential election. Rogers and Coats repeatedly declined to answer, even as Coats admitted that he was not sure he had a legal basis for doing so.<\/p>\n Featured Image: SAUL LOEB\/AFP\/Getty Images<\/small><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com\/2016\/08\/gettyimages-96263974.jpg?w=680\")
In a Senate Select Intelligence Committee hearing that often veered off route, two of the nation’s most powerful intelligence figures made their case for extending a controversial portion of the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act known as Section 702, which allows the government to intercept the communications of foreign intelligence targets. Read More<\/a><\/p>\n\n<\/img><\/a>
<\/img><\/a>
<\/img><\/a>
<\/img><\/a>
<\/img><\/a>
<\/img><\/a>\n<\/div>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5817,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[25],"tags":[59,66,26],"class_list":["post-343045","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-technology","tag-media","tag-techcrunch","tag-technology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/343045","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5817"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=343045"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/343045\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=343045"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=343045"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.utm.my\/asmawisham\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=343045"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}