It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Senators push bill requiring warrant for U.S. data under spy law

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 24 2017 @ 09:02 AM
While everyone is looking at Harvey, Trump, and Hillary........

WASHINGTON, Oct 24 (Reuters) - A bipartisan group of at least 10 U.S. senators plans to introduce on Tuesday legislation that would substantially reform aspects of the National Security Agency's warrantless internet surveillance program, according to congressional aides.

The effort, led by Democrat Ron Wyden and Republican Rand Paul, would require a warrant for queries of data belonging to any American collected under the program. The bill's introduction is likely to add uncertainty to how Congress will renew a controversial portion of a spying law due to expire on Dec. 31.

This appears to be a step in the right direction. Unlimited access to Americans data has caused problems for the last couple of administraions, as they went beyond their scope and spied on american citizens.

Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is considered by U.S. intelligence officials to be among their most vital tools used to combat national and cyber security threats and help protect American allies. It allows U.S. intelligence agencies to eavesdrop on and store vast amounts of digital communications from foreign suspects living outside the United States. The surveillance program, classified details of which were exposed in 2013 by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, also incidentally scoops up communications of Americans, including if they communicate with a foreign target living overseas. Those communications can then be subject to searches without a warrant, including by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a practice that the USA Rights Act authored by Wyden and Paul would end.

Searches without warrants was one of the reasons for the war for independence to begin this nation.
No one should wield this power over american citizens.

Separately, the Senate Intelligence Committee is expected to privately vote on Tuesday on a bill to reauthorize Section 702 that privacy advocates say will lack their reform priorities. Wyden sent a letter on Monday urging committee leaders to allow a public vote, saying the bill "will have enormous impact on the security, liberty, and constitutional rights of the American people" and should be debated in the open.

But the more things change the more they stay the same.
This needs to be a public vote in the sunshine. We need to know what senators and congresspeople would sell out the american citizen in the name of "security".

posted on Oct, 24 2017 @ 09:09 AM
"Separately, the Senate Intelligence Committee is expected to privately vote on Tuesday on a bill to reauthorize Section 702 that privacy advocates say will lack their reform priorities"

In Secret ? Boy I'm sold........

posted on Oct, 24 2017 @ 09:11 AM
It needs to be public.

If it is in the publics interest then it should be public.

There should be no closed doors in our system of government.

posted on Oct, 24 2017 @ 09:46 AM
Yeah, a step in the right direction alright.

A group of 10 senators spearheading this, out of how many? 100?

The same handful that all the other politicians gang up on, mock, and throw under the bus.

Wonder what the other 90 senators have to say about the right to spy on their constituents when they return from their round of golf.

But i do agree, any votes made by reresentatives of the state should be public infirmation and at least a paragraph explaination in laymans terms on why they voted the way they did.
edit on 24-10-2017 by Jimmycrackerson3 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 24 2017 @ 10:55 AM
see what happens when Democrats and Republicans sit together and get along, they come up with good ideas, this should happen more often

posted on Oct, 24 2017 @ 11:19 AM
They'll just find an attorney that will "interpret" the law in such a way that allows them to continue doing what they've been doing all along.

Because that's exactly what they've done every other time a court has told them to stop.

posted on Oct, 24 2017 @ 12:17 PM
a reply to: Shamrock6

Isn't that the truth.

Maybe one day they will run out of ways to use language to circumvent COTUS.

new topics

top topics


log in