\n<\/p>\n
From the beginning of my time in Washington \u2014 even before many revelations of government abuses under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) were disclosed \u2014 I have consistently warned of vast government surveillance powers being used against Americans, without a warrant, and outside the protections of the Constitution.<\/p>\n
Section 702 of FISA is intended for use against hostile foreign countries and terrorists, to protect the American people from threats overseas, which I support. But to use that authority to spy on innocent Americans \u2014 to rummage through their texts, calls, and emails here in the United States without a warrant merely because intelligence agencies incidentally sweep them up?<\/p>\n
This is often referred to as a backdoor search, and the practice is blatantly unconstitutional and incompatible with the Fourth Amendment.<\/p>\n
I introduced the Fourth Amendment Restoration and Protection Act for this exact reason. This legislation will end secret warrantless backdoor searches and finally bring FISA in line with our Constitution. As Congress is poised to consider another extension to FISA, I will once again demand these urgent reforms.<\/p>\n
In the midst of this debate over FISA, it\u2019s important to recall that Washington, D.C. has repeatedly dismissed my warnings about FISA. It isn\u2019t happening, I was told. There were unconcerned assurances from the then-Obama administration and from within Congress that the secret oversight of our intelligence agencies was working; that there was no mass surveillance of Americans; and that to even consider changing the status quo would somehow jeopardize national security.<\/p>\n
We now know that none of these assurances were true \u2014 that there was mass surveillance that included Americans, and there was, in fact, bulk collection of Americans\u2019 communications. We learned how brazenly the government thwarts the Constitution through loopholes and legal maneuvering, made possible by courts that rely on interpretations of law that predate the digital revolution of our modern world.<\/p>\n
There have been improper searches of innocent Americans. In fact, the government doesn\u2019t even need to collect Americans\u2019 information to search it; it can simply buy it from data brokers. The practice of selling customer data to the government should be illegal, and there are restrictions in existing law, but once again, the legal architecture is too old and doesn\u2019t properly reflect the digital nature of records-keeping.<\/p>\n
This is why a warrant requirement is so important.<\/p>\n
The American people now see that the constitutional wall of protection around their rights has a wide-open gate. It\u2019s why about two-thirds of Americans now support a warrant requirement for information collected under FISA, while only 16 percent<\/span><\/a> oppose it. The momentum is towards reform, which is why many congressional opponents of reform, including the leadership of both political parties, have collaborated with the surveillance state in an attempt to co-opt the FISA reform momentum.<\/p>\n Instead of adopting strong protections like a warrant requirement, they push for illusory, pretend reforms. For example, the 2024 FISA extension bill ignored popular reform proposals introduced in Congress \u2014 including a warrant requirement \u2014 and instead included a collection of \u201creforms\u201d that either codified already-existing practices or actually weakened protections, according to an assessment<\/span><\/a> published by the Brennan Center.<\/p>\n After pushing empty reforms in 2024, the same figures are now calling for a \u201cclean\u201d extension of FISA. In Washington-speak, a \u201cclean\u201d extension means no reform. Congress must stand firm against such a plan.<\/p>\n At one time, these figures told reformers like me that they needed a clean extension of FISA because abuses weren\u2019t happening. We\u2019ve come so far that they now concede that it\u2019s happening, but that it\u2019s good. At least they\u2019re being more honest now.<\/p>\n Congress cannot pass the buck again. The solution is to restore the constitutional standard: if the government wants to search an American\u2019s private data, it must get a warrant based on probable cause. It\u2019s what the American people want. It\u2019s what the Constitution demands.<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n U.S. Senator Rand Paul, M.D., (R-KY) is one of the nation\u2019s leading advocates for liberty. Senator Paul serves as the chair of the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. He has represented Kentucky in the U.S. Senate since 2011. He and his wife, Kelley, live in Bowling Green and are the parents of three sons.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n