FISA Debate Detail

Arguments pulled from deliberation quotes.

1. Bill does not include immunity for government persons
2. Scope is limited to period between 9/11/01 and 01/07
3. Activity was done at the behest of the President of the United States
4. Program was deemed legal by administration officials and the US Attorney General
5. Companies participated at great risk to their stock value
6. Companies participated at great risk to their financial solvency
7. Companies participated at great risk to their reputation
8. Companies participated at great risk to the safety of their employees
9. Government requires assistance from the private sector. Lawsuits will result in decreased cooperation.
10. Companies face severe financial hardship from defending lawsuits
11. Companies face severe financial hardship from possible judgments, despite doing nothing wrong
12. Immunity only covers cases where the Attorney General certifies that the defendant companies received written requests or directives from top levels of the Government for their assistance.
13. The companies in these cases are prevented from making their own defense in court.
14. The companies in these cases are prevented from making their own defense in public.
15. The companies in these cases are prevented from making their own defense even if they never participated in the program
16. These companies have no financial motives in providing assistance to the Government.
17. It was this administration, not the companies, that made a flawed legal determination.
18. It has been pointed out that there is a longstanding common law provision that allows citizens to rely on the assumption that the Government acted legally when it asks a private citizen or a company to assist it for the common good. All that is required is that the citizen act in good faith.
19. Telecom executives and lawyers are not experts on article II of the Constitution. It was too hard to understand the legality.
20. The companies did nothing wrong.
21. The intelligence community cannot obtain the intelligence it needs without assistance from these companies.
22. Allowing continued litigation also risks the disclosure of highly classified information regarding intelligence sources and methods, providing an advantage to our enemies.
23. Companies exemplify patriotism.
24. This was part of the protection of the US and is very Top Secret and we cannot talk about what went on.
25. Close inspection of the lawsuits against the telecoms reveals dubious claims. The plaintiffs have confused speculation for established facts.
26. Congress should not condone oversight through litigation.
27. The point of the lawsuit against the telecoms is to reveal state secrets
28. The lawsuits help the terrorists.
29. Committee members held lots of meetings, spoke to experts, and reviewed classified information not available to others when coming to the conclusion that amnesty is appropriate.

1. Procedures of FISA bill apply only to person outside of the United States.
2. Minimization procedures that involve US persons must be approved by the US Attorney General and are subject to review by FISA courts.
3. US citizens are protected from unwarranted eavesdropping when traveling outside the United States.
4. Adequate oversight of execution of the laws is provided by the judicial and legislative branches.
5. Due to technological advances, the US government needed to update the FISA bill in order to conduct legally surveillance over new media, and new telecommunications infrastructure architecture.

30. Due to technological advances, U.S. government agencies tasked with gathering foreign intelligence were severely limited or completely shut-out of the ability to legally go after foreign targets who may have had vital information on attacks on US interests or who were actively working to attack US interests.
31. Activities undertaken under the President's direction and within the FISA court jurisdiction has provided intelligence that successfully thwarted attacks on US interests.
32. Prior to updates to FISA, service men and women were the most at risk.
33. Prior to the Protect America Act, the intelligence community lost about two-thirds of the ability to collect intelligence against al-Qaida.
34. There are no incidents of abuse of the Protect America Act
35. The President's acts could not have been unconstitutional since we passed the Protect America Act that legalized those acts.
36. Prior to Protect America, court approval was required to collect foreign intelligence

37. Liberals, leftists, and civil libertarians exaggerate the dangers of an overreaching government and this endangers the country and its citizens.
38. Liberals, leftists, and civil libertarians were responsible for the wall between the FBI and the CIA.
39. Liberals, leftists, and civil libertarians mandated that the CIA could not obtain information from dangerous people.
40. Liberals, leftists, and civil libertarians love the US Constitution and liberty more than laws allowing the CIA to obtain information from dangerous people.
41. This bill only infringes on terrorists' right to privacy.
42. FISA was never intended to impede the collection of foreign intelligence.
43. Amendments to FISA would only apply to surveillance directed at individuals who are located outside the United States.
44. Government must get warrants for any surveillance on people in the United States
45. US laws do not apply overseas. Supreme Court has ruled that some Constitutional rights extend to US citizens when outside of the US. This ruling does not include the 4th amendment's warrant clause. As an example, in a criminal prosecution, U.S. courts will accept evidence against U.S. citizens obtained by foreign governments without the probable cause demanded by U.S. law. U.S. courts recognize that the Bill of Rights does not protect Americans from the acts of foreign sovereigns, and excluding evidence obtained by them will not deter foreign governments from collecting it. Therefore, the evidence can be turned over to the United States and used in a criminal prosecution.
46. The intelligence community will now be required to obtain authorization from the FISA Court prior to conducting surveillance against terrorists or spies overseas who assist foreign governments merely because they are United States persons.
47. The intelligence community has proven how careful they've been when conducting surveillance and should not be required to jump through hoops.
48. Inhibiting the intelligence community from protecting US citizens is the result of partisan politics.
49. We should be focused on collecting intelligence to prevent an attack rather than worrying about attacks after the fact.
50. Surveillance will not be abused because activities must be reported to Congress.
51. Spies don't have time to spy on Americans
52. Judiciary bill vs. the Intelligence bill, severely limits intelligence gathering.
53. Protocols exist deal with foreign intelligence gathering that includes a US person and so should not be in this bill.
54. A warrant would not be required for foreign to US communications if it was criminal, but it is required if it is regarding terrorism.
55. If a terrorist calls a US based travel agent, shouldn't we track that w/o getting a warrant?
56. This bill affords protections of US citizens that go far beyond the original FISA bill.
57. The courts have ruled that the President has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence.
58. FISA cannot encroach on the President's constitutional Power.
59. Old FISA bill burdensome conditions requiring paperwork to get warrants inhibited intelligence gathering and directly contributed to the death three kidnapped American soldiers.
60. House Bill requires court orders for surveillance on foreign targets in foreign lands, for the first time in the history of FISA.
61. Islamic terrorists do not wear uniforms, hide among civilian populations, kill innocent men, women, and children, and do not abide by the Geneva Convention.
62. FISA bill should not in any way imply that warrants are required to target foreign terrorists overseas.
63. Foreign terrorists should not receive 4th amendment protections
64. Bill should not include ambiguous terms over what foreign conversations can be targetted since this may confuse analysts and lead to ignoring vital intelligence.
65. Bill should not be produced that will be vetoed.
66. Members of the intelligence committee worked very hard, talked to lots of people, met with intelligence officials, conducted hearings, read top-secret documents in preparation for this legislation. Members had access to information no one else had.
67. Everyone complained about the lack of good intelligence prior to 9/11, so this bill fixes that.
68. The President authorized these programs, some of which had been authorized before and no one objected then.
69. Here is something that should make all Americans scratch their heads. Before September 11, the Government would not need a warrant to target this criminal [Adam Gadahn is an American citizen from Orange County, CA.] After September 11, the Government would not need a warrant to target Gadahn. But after this bill is signed, the Government will be required to get a warrant to target Gadahn.