Presentation on theme: "1 The USA PATRIOT Act: Past, Present, Future EDUCAUSE Live! Webcast June 7, 2005 Jim Dempsey Center for Democracy & Technology"— Presentation transcript:
1 The USA PATRIOT Act: Past, Present, Future EDUCAUSE Live! Webcast June 7, 2005 Jim Dempsey Center for Democracy & Technology
2 Legislative History 9/20/ Administration draft first circulated. 9/24 - House Judiciary holds its only hearing, AG only witness. 10/3 – House Judiciary Committee markup – bipartisan support. In Senate, full Judiciary Comm holds no hearings. Constitution Sub holds one hearing. No Subcommittee or full Committee mark-up. 10/8 – Speaker refuses to move House Judiciary Comm bill. 10/11 - Senate passes bill; one Senator offers 4 amendments – tabled. 10/12 – 3:43 AM new House bill issued, passed by House. 10/23 – final action in House 10/ 25 – final action in Senate 10/ 26 - signed by Pres.
3 Prevention of Terrorism Does Not Require Suspension of Standards and Oversight Terrorism poses a grave and imminent threat to our nation. The government must have strong investigative authorities to collect information to prevent terrorism. These authorities, however, must be guided by the Fourth Amendment, and subject to Executive and judicial controls as well as legislative oversight and a measure of public transparency.
4 Abuses of civil liberties and human rights – outside the PATRIOT Act The torture at Abu Ghraib and other locations. The detention of US citizens in military jails without criminal charges. The detention of foreign nationals in Guantanamo and other locations. The rendition of detainees to other governments known to engage in torture. Haphazard and prolonged post 9/11 detentions of foreign nationals in the U.S., the physical abuse of some and the blanket closing of deportation hearings. Abuse of the material witness law to hold individuals in jail without charges.
5 PATRIOT Act Themes Intelligence searches -- broader scope and greater secrecy call for compensating controls Fourth Amendment standards: o Judicial approval o Factual basis o Particularized suspicion o Notice The storage revolution - records held by third parties
6 “The Wall” – Primary Purpose and Info Sharing Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) vs criminal o Criminal investigators are now able to initiate and control FISA surveillances. o FISA court now issues more surveillance orders in national security cases than all the other federal judges issue in all other criminal cases o Lack of full right to challenge at trial Sharing grand jury, other criminal info
7 Business Records Provision Court order to compel disclosure of any kind of records, upon the mere claim that they are connected with an intelligence investigation. o Gives the FBI authority to get court order to seize any records of any entity. Includes libraries and bookstores. o No factual basis need be stated. o No particularized suspicion (vs. “agent of a foreign power”). o Allows the FBI to obtain whole databases of information, including records of people not suspected of any wrongdoing. o Judges must approve every request submitted by the government. o Gag order applies.
8 National Security Letters o Financial o Credit o Telephone/Internet No judicial approval No factual basis No particularized suspicion
9 Emergency Disclosures Section 212 o Authorizes an ISP to disclose , stored voic , draft documents and other stored information to law enforcement when government states that there is an emergency involving a threat to life. Section 217 o Authorizes the government to carry out real-time surveillance when an ISP, a university, or another system operator authorizes the surveillance on the grounds that there is a “trespasser” within the operator’s computer network.
10 “Off the Books” Surveillance There is never a report to a judge. (In contrast, under both Title III and FISA, when electronic surveillance is carried out on an emergency basis, an application must be filed after the fact.) There is no time limit placed on the disclosures or interceptions. (A Title III wiretap cannot continue for more than 30 days without new approval.) There is never notice to the person whose communications are intercepted or disclosed. The interceptions and disclosures are not reported to Congress.
11 Sneak and Peek Searches Allows law enforcement agencies to search homes and offices without notifying the owner for days or weeks after. Not only in terrorism cases, but in all cases. Requires search warrant. Standard: whenever there is reasonable cause to believe that notice at time of search may result in o danger of physical harm o flight from prosecution, o destruction of evidence o intimidation of potential witnesses; o otherwise seriously jeopardize an investigation or unduly delay a trial.
12 Sunsets Of over 150 provisions in the PATRIOT Act, only 16 provisions are covered by the sunset. They include o Sec. 203(b) – sharing criminal wiretap information w/ intelligence agencies o Sec. 206 – roving taps under FISA o Sec. 212 – emergency disclosures of w/o a court order o Sec. 215 – access to business records under FISA (the “library records” provision) o Sec. 217 – interception of computer trespasser communications w/o a court order o Sec. 218 – the “significant purpose” provision
13 Sunsets (cont’d) Some controversial provisions are not covered by the sunset, including: o Sec. 213 – sneak and peek searches o Sec. 216 – pen registers for the Internet o Sec. 358, 505 – “National Security Letter” exceptions to privacy laws o Sec. 802 – definition of domestic terrorism
14 No Tech Mandates. No Data Retention Requirements Section 222: “Nothing in this Act shall impose any additional technical obligations or requirement on a provider of a wire or electronic communication service or other person to furnish facilities or technical assistance.”
15 Security and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act FISA Roving Wiretaps (Section 206 of the PATRIOT Act) Require identification of either location or target “Sneak & Peek” Searches (Section 213) eliminate the catch-all provision limit initial delay to 7 days, extensible by court
16 Security and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act (cont’d) FISA Orders for Library and Other Personal Records (Section 215) restore a standard of individualized suspicion for obtaining a FISA order - facts indicating a reason to believe the tangible things sought relate to a suspected terrorist or spy give the recipient of a FISA order the right to challenge the order require a showing by the government that a gag order is necessary place a time limit on the gag order (which could be extended by the court) give a recipient the right to challenge the gag order
17 Security and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act (cont’d) National Security Letters (Section 505) restore a standard of individualized suspicion - reason to believe the records sought relate to a suspected terrorist or spy give the recipient of an NSL the right to challenge the letter and the nondisclosure requirement place a time limit on the nondisclosure requirement
18 Security and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act (cont’d) Pen Registers and Trap and Trace Devices (Section 216) raise standard for obtaining pen/trap orders - facts indicating a reason to believe that the information sought is relevant require delayed notice to individuals who are targets of pen/traps
19 Security and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act (cont’d) Domestic Terrorism Definition (Section 802) PATRIOT Act’s overbroad definition of domestic terrorism could include acts of civil disobedience by political organizations. SAFE Act would limit the qualifying offenses for domestic terrorism to those that constitute a federal crime of terrorism, instead of any federal or state crime, FISA Public Reporting
20 PATRIOT Expansion Administrative Subpoenas No judicial approval No notice to interested party Not normally available to FBI Different from grand jury subpoena
21 CALEA and VoIP Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (CALEA) Requires telephone companies to design switches to ensure governmental access Excludes “information services” – shorthand in 1994 for the Internet Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) Telephony is migrating to Internet Where does the design obligation reside – o Transport layer o Application layer Federal Communications Comm’n (FCC) proceeding
22 The Future of Surveillance Keystroke loggers Location information (e.g., GPS) The storage revolution – the benefits and risks of remote storage Gmail – 1 gigabyte free Yahoo! Paid customers – 2 gigabytes Photos, calendars, drafts VoIP storage
23 A Positive Agenda increasing the standard for pen registers and trap and trace devices extending Title III’s statutory suppression rule to electronic communications eliminating the distinctions between opened and unopened and between relatively fresh and older establishing a probable cause standard for access to location information requiring reporting on access to stored communications