Today, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-New York), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, spoke out against a five year extension of the warrantless wiretapping provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

“While it is appropriate for our government to gather foreign intelligence, and some degree of secrecy is necessary, it is also vital that a free society limit government, protect the constitutional rights of Americans here and abroad, and limit warrantless spying to genuine foreign intelligence . . . . But we won’t get to debate that.  Failure to do so is a dereliction of our constitutional duty and a betrayal of our liberties,” said Nadler.

To see video of Congressman Nadler’s remarks, click here.

Congressman Nadler’s prepared statement follows:

            “I rise in opposition to the FISA Amendments Act of 2012. 

“If we had an opportunity to evaluate the law based on experience, and consider some alternatives, my opposition would not be necessary, but the Republican Majority once again has told the members of this House and the American people that it’s ‘my way or the highway.’

            “While it is appropriate for our government to gather foreign intelligence, and some degree of secrecy is necessary, it is also vital that a free society limit government, protect the constitutional rights of Americans here and abroad, and limit warrantless spying to genuine foreign intelligence.

            “Unfortunately, we have seen repeatedly how even the very minimal restraints Congress put on FISA have been violated.  We should address those abuses.

            “The American people deserve better, and Congress has an obligation to exert more control over spy agencies than simply to give them a blank check for another five years.

            “The Gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Conyers] had an amendment that would have shortened the sunset by two years, but we won’t even have a chance to consider it – perhaps because some of our Republican colleagues might also want to support it.  As a result, we will not revisit the law until after the end of the next presidential term.

            “I had an amendment that would have required the Attorney General to make publicly available a summary of each decision of the FISA court and the FISA court of review that includes a significant construction or interpretation of section 702, which allows warrantless surveillance, with appropriate security redactions and editing.  

            “Many U.S. citizens, and others who have nothing to do with foreign intelligence gathering, are caught up in this surveillance, and government has an obligation to protect their rights.  FISA is supposed to do that, and we need to ensure that the law is working.

            “Disclosure of classified information is not needed to know whether the court performs meaningful oversight of the executive branch, applies minimization standards correctly, and whether or not we ought to amend the law.

            “The Gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner] said, ‘rather than playing the numbers game either with the actual targets or the people who are incidentally surveilled, perhaps decisions of the FISA court, particularly the review of the FISA court appropriately redacted, would be able to give us the answer to that question . . . . I have always been one that favored disclosure.’

            “The Gentleman is right. If the FISA court is just a rubber stamp of the executive branch, the public should know. And if the court really does provide meaningful oversight and meaningful supervision and meaningful limitations on the executive branch, the public should know that too.

            “But we won’t get to debate that.  Failure to do so is a dereliction of our constitutional duty and a betrayal of our liberties.

            “I urge my colleagues to reject this legislation and demand that we properly consider this very important issue.

            “I thank the Gentleman, and I yield back.”

###