Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Brought Before High Court

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Brought Before High Court
Published: 11 Nov, 2012
3 min read

Credit: Militaryradio.com

surveillance act

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was enacted in 1978 under President Carter with the purpose of prescribing electronic surveillance rights and procedures within the United States to collect foreign intelligence information. FISA provides a framework for allowing electronic surveillance in cases where national security is at issue.  More specifically, it allows for surveillance of “communications of foreign powers or agents of foreign powers.”

FISA Amendments

FISA has been amended several times, including the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which legalized warrantless wiretapping.  Title I of FISA permits "the President, acting through the Attorney General, to authorize electronic surveillances for foreign intelligence purposes without a court order in certain circumstances.” American citizens can be subject of warrantless electronic surveillance if they are deemed agents of a foreign power as defined in the statute.

In September of 2012, the House approved sweeping measures reaffirming FISA and passed the FISA Amendments Act, which reauthorized “broad electronic eavesdropping powers that legalized and expanded the George W. Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program.” It gives the National Security Agency broad powers for warrantless electronic surveillance for another five years. No additional privacy protections were added to the amendment.

Delicate Balance between Civil Liberties and Security

Due to the scope of FISA, which has often been criticized for having too large of a scope, the late Senator Ted Kennedy made the following comment about the balance between civil liberties and protecting US citizens:

“Electronic surveillance can be a useful tool for the Government’s gathering of certain kinds of information; yet, if abused, it can also constitute a particularly indiscriminate and penetrating invasion of the privacy of our citizens.”

While some argue that there is no constitutional right to privacy, FISA has been criticized primarily under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees the right of people against “unreasonable searches and seizures” such that “no Warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause.”

FISA allows warrantless searches under circumstances that fall under the statute. It is unknown how many people have been monitored under authority from the act, but there has been “at least one occasion” where the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, created under FISA, has found there to be an illegal search under the Fourth Amendment.

The Supreme Court Weighs In

The US Supreme Court has never expressly decided whether the president has the constitutional authority to authorize electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes. That may soon change.

IVP Donate

On October 29, the Supreme Court heard arguments from the ACLU challenging the FISA Amendments Act, which gives the National Security Agency almost unchecked power to monitor the international phone calls and emails of US citizens.

The ACLU argued that, “Under the FAA, the government can target anyone — human rights researchers, academics, attorneys, political activists, journalists — simply because they are foreigners outside the United States, and in the course of its surveillance it can collect Americans’ communications with those individuals.”

The case has not been decided, but the ACLU is pleased with the court’s response thus far, stating that the court "seemed appropriately skeptical of the government’s attempts to shield this sweeping surveillance law from meaningful judicial review.”

You Might Also Like

Xavier Becerra Bolts Into First Place in IVN California Governor Poll
Xavier Becerra Bolts Into First Place in IVN California Governor Poll
Survey of 3,404 verified California voters shows Democrat in front. Second-choice data reveals where Yee's supporters are headed....
20 Apr, 2026
-
8 min read
Judge Slams Door on New Attack Against California’s Top Two Primary
Judge Slams Door on New Attack Against California’s Top Two Primary
A group of minor parties in California challenged the state's nonpartisan Top Two primary in court and a federal judge handed them another loss, ruling in part that they can’t keep suing over arguments already rejected by other courts....
15 Apr, 2026
-
4 min read
Why We Call Ourselves Independent Voter News
Why We Call Ourselves Independent Voter News
For 15 years, we have published more than 14,000 articles written by people from different walks of life, different parts of the country, and different political backgrounds....
01 Apr, 2026
-
2 min read