Local News & Commentary Since 1890.

Posts Tagged ‘surveillance’

We Need to Stop Warrantless Spying on Americans. Here’s How.

In history, National News, News Media, Opinion, Politics, Uncategorized on April 17, 2026 at 9:38 am

COURTESY: The New York Times – April 17, 2026

A photo of a blurry surveillance camera, in the foreground, against a sharper-focused seascape in the background.
Credit…Grade Solomon

By Mike Lee and Dick Durbin

Mr. Lee and Mr. Durbin are senators.

Add The New York Times on Google 

This article was updated to reflect news developments.

We disagree on many issues. One of us is a longtime Democrat, the other a conservative Republican. But both of us are deeply concerned about warrantless government surveillance of the American people.

In 2008, Congress enacted Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to allow the government to gather vital intelligence about foreign governments, terrorists and spies. The problem is that it has also allowed agencies like the F.B.I. and the National Security Agency to regularly gather and search through the private communications of American citizens without a warrant. That is a clear violation of rights protected by the Constitution.

It’s true that Section 702 doesn’t allow the direct targeting of Americans, but their communications are still often gathered during the warrantless surveillance of foreigners abroad. Once the government has this data, agencies then have the ability to search through it. And they do: Transparency reports reveal that thousands of such searches are performed every year. A federal court previously found that some the F.B.I. had conducted had violated the Fourth Amendment.

Predictably, without a requirement for court approval of these searches, abuses have been rampant. As a recent report from the Brennan Center for Justice highlighted, F.B.I. agents in recent years have searched for the communications of “protesters across the political spectrummembers of Congress; a congressional chief of staff; a state court judgemultiple U.S. government officials, journalists and political commentators; and 19,000 donors to a political campaign.” In a time of extreme partisanship, these abuses have provoked bipartisan outrage.

Congress should have a serious and informed debate on these issues rather than ramming through a reauthorization of Section 702 with minimal reforms yet again, sidelining Americans’ constitutional rights in the process.

That’s why the two of us have proposed the Security and Freedom Enhancement (SAFE) Act, a compromise that would reauthorize the valuable core of this tool while enacting reasonable safeguards to protect the Fourth Amendment rights of all Americans.

The government would still be able to check its databases to uncover connections between targeted foreigners and Americans. But it would have to get court approval in the small number of cases in which these searches have generated results and the government has a proper basis for gaining access to the contents of the communications. Importantly, our warrant requirement also contains robust exceptions for legitimate emergencies, so that we can balance civil liberties with legitimate security needs.

Our bill would also cut off another form of warrantless surveillance: the widespread practice of circumventing the Fourth Amendment by purchasing Americans’ sensitive information from data brokers.

The Department of Justice (including the Drug Enforcement Administration and the F.B.I.), the Department of Homeland Security (including ICE, Customs and Border Patrol and the Secret Service) and the Defense Intelligence Agency have purchased cellphone location information for millions of Americans. Such information is highly sensitive and can reveal intimate details of that person’s life. Even more troubling, artificial intelligence could supercharge such surveillance, allowing the government to harvest and analyze mass quantities of highly personal and sensitive information about Americans without court approval. Our legislation would close these loopholes — again with pragmatic exceptions to accommodate legitimate safety and security needs.

Congress should not take an all-or-nothing approach to reauthorizing Section 702. We have the time and the responsibility to get this right. Members may disagree about what reforms are required — that’s why we have debates and amendments. But simply extending the law without any changes to protect Americans’ privacy should be off the table.

We owe it to the American people to meet this moment and do our jobs to protect both national security and civil liberties. Our bill offers a bipartisan solution to do just that.

Mike Lee, Republican of Utah, and Dick Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, are senators.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on FacebookInstagramTikTokBlueskyWhatsApp and Threads.

Is Big Brother watching too closely?

In National News, Opinion, Politics on June 19, 2013 at 2:06 pm

DIH LOGO

In his book, “1984,” author George Orwell noted, “If you want to keep a secret, you must also hide it from yourself.” Even though he published his most famous work in 1949, Orwell seems to have had a sixth sense about the future of government scrutiny.

Orwell’s dystopian society may seem too dark and ominous to be believable, but given the recent events surrounding the National Security Agency’s (NSA) surveillance operations, it may be more reality than fiction. As more information is revealed about these activities, congressional hearings are turning up little in the way of explanations by those in charge.

So why is it so offensive that the government would eaves drop on phone calls and emails to help prevent another 9-11 disaster? According to officials, hundreds of potential threats have been thwarted thanks to the tireless efforts of those who invade the privacy of law-abiding Americans. Unfortunately, since all of that information is classified, there is no evidence to show the public that corroborates their claim.

Civil liberties watchdog groups pounced on this story as soon as the information was leaked to the press. The question begs asking, however – under which rock were the leaders of these groups living where they didn’t think this was going on already? To the bigger point, who cares?

Modern society is full of surveillance cameras, listening devices and internet-based tracking systems, only a tiny fraction of which are used by government agencies. Most of them are operated privately to collect marketing or usage information or provide security. And people just accept it. It’s there, there’s nothing that can be done about it and just part of life in a technologically advancing society.

ringyIn the early 1900’s, “party lines” were the main method for which residential customers were provided with telephone service. Everyone on the same circuit would have to wait their turn to use the telephone and simply agree not to listen in on each other’s conversations. Of course, this was a source of great amusement in early radio and television comedy sketches. Today, it would be viewed as a huge invasion of privacy and thoroughly unacceptable.

Barreling through continually updated technology requires that people must adapt at a faster pace. Users of that technology should be aware that anything posted on the internet or passed through an electronic broadcast system (i.e.: cell phones, Wi-Fi, etc.) could be intercepted without their permission or knowledge. There’s no telling who is listening or reading any of it or what will become of that information.

If the NSA or other government agencies are tracking information, the assumption should be that there is something worth listening to. If they’re violating the law based on having no just cause for acting on that information then it’s probably best to let the courts iron it out, not congress. The last thing anyone wants is for the one group in America with the most detrimental secrets – and with the hardest time keeping them – to be in control of everyone else’s.

Whether there is legitimate cause for any branch of the U.S. government to spy on its own people is still debatable. As it is, President Obama now finds himself in defense of an administration whose platform for election included condemnation of the previous one for the same kinds of anti-privacy actions.

In a post-9/11 America, the Bush administration was constantly under fire for what liberals saw as a violation of privacy and infringement of civil liberties all in the name of national security. As it turns out, what’s good for the goose really does appear to be good for the gander. The truth is, Democrat or Republican, as long as terrorists threaten the free nations of the world there will always be some loss of personal privacy in the name of security.

In “1984,” Orwell presented a future devoid of personal freedoms and independent thought, not protected from terror but from free choice. America’s leaders have a choice – to be diligent or let history repeat itself in the name of popular opinion. In the meantime, the citizenry will have choices to make as well – in the next elections.

Gery L. Deer is an independent journalist and business writer from Jamestown, Ohio. More at the new website, http://www.deerinheadlines.com.