Thursday, Jul 24, 2014 12:22 am est

FISA Amendment Act overlooked by public, grants government too much power

Posted on December 29, 2012 | by Chris DiNardo

I watched CSPAN2 Thursday morning. I wasn’t sick. I wasn’t playing a drinking game. And I’m not turned on by monotonous politispeak masqueraded as sagacity. Rather, I was interested in how debate would proceed concerning the reauthorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments Act, a bill originally passed in 2008 that allows for wiretapping of emails, phone calls and other communications going to or coming from overseas. The wiretapping is carried out by way of secret FISA court orders, which, unlike regular warrants, do not require any probable cause.

I was not disappointed by the debate. Listening to the grand majority of the Senate debate this bill was like watching a live-action version of “Hungry, Hungry Hippos” where all of the marbles are the Fourth Amendment.

The original domestic spying bill, which also granted retroactive immunity to telecommunications that had participated in the Bush administration’s illegal, warrantless wiretapping program, was reauthorized easily, causing no blip on the political radar. Thanks largely to the much more publicized conundrum of how Washingtonian compromise can prevent us from falling off a fiscal cliff and how our fizzy lifting drink of obscene discretionary spending has us floating dangerously close to our next debt ceiling, no attention was paid to the FISA vote.

In true bipartisan spirit, the bill was passed without a single, vital amendment attached, reauthorizing its powers for another five years. And such a reauthorization continues to pose a momentous problem for civil liberties and privacy concerns. As the American Civil Liberties Union notes, “The law’s effect — and indeed, the law’s main purpose — is to give the government nearly unfettered access to Americans’ international communications.”

Thanks to today’s reauthorization, such access is free from those pesky constraints of checks, balances, transparency or reasonable limits on government authority. This, in essence, codifies secret law that leaves Americans unaware of the act’s scope, since little information exists as to how intelligence organizations are interpreting the bill. Not to mention how notoriously deferential FISA courts have been to law enforcement powers, becoming a mere legal speed bump in our already extensive wiretapping road trip.

During debate, Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, addressed the concerns of some members of the Senate by warning that not reauthorizing the FISA bill would lead to grave national security threats from bad people who hate freedom and liberty and rainbows and unicorns. It’s hard to monger fear as well as Feinstein can. She insisted that the oversight measures already embedded in the bill were sufficient, when, in actuality, they simply broaden the already expansive powers. That rhetoric was enough to ensure 73 yea votes.

By and large, it was debate that would have Sen. Obama circa 2007 rolling over in his grave. It was debate that joined conservative Democrats with Republicans to make sure President Obama could adequately maintain such overreaching powers. It was debate that showed that many of our elected officials fail to represent the rights of the people they are meant to serve. Instead, they show that in reality, their spines are made from telecom lobbyist checks and National Security Agency business cards. Individual liberties certainly cannot hold a candle to those.

When the consensus is that search and seizure is no longer unreasonable, the whims of our politicians begin to circumvent the thrust of our Constitution.

Chris DiNardo is opinion editor. Email him at


profile portrait
Felipe De La Hoz

Multimedia Editor | Felipe De La Hoz is a Colombian national studying journalism at the College of Arts and Sciences. Having been born in Colombia and raised in the United States, Mexico and Brazil, Felipe is a trilingual travel aficionado and enjoys working in varied and difficult environments. Apart from his photography, Felipe enjoys investigative reporting and interviews, interviewing the likes of Colombian ex-M-19 guerrilla fighters and controversial politician Jimmy McMillan. He has covered everything from governmental conferences to full-blown riots, as well as portraiture shoots and dining photography. Having worked under Brazilian photojournalists for Reuters and AFP, Felipe hopes to one day work on demanding journalistic projects and contribute to the global news cycle.

Ann Schmidt

News Editor | Ann is a liberal studies sophomore who lived in Florence during her freshman year. She plans on double-majoring in journalism and political science and is always busy. She is constantly making lists and she loves to laugh.


Daniel Yeom

Daniel started at the Features desk of WSN last Spring, writing restaurant reviews whilst indulging on free food and consequently getting fat. Last Fall, he was the dining editor, and he this semester he is senior editor. Daniel is in Gallatin (living the dream) studying Food & Travel Narratives, incorporating aspects of Food Studies, Journalism, and Media, Culture, and Communication. He loves food more than life itself.

Hannah Luu

Deputy Multimedia Editor | Hannah Luu is a ridiculously great Deputy Multimedia Editor. She is a sophomore from Northern California. If you think Northern California means San Francisco you might need to closely examine a map. She is passionate about NPR and being half Asian.

  • How to join:

    The Washington Square News holds open weekly budget meetings at its office located at 838 Broadway every Sunday. All are welcome to attend, no matter your background in journalism, writing, or reporting. Specific times for meetings by desk are listed below. If you wish to talk to an editor before you attend, feel free to check out the Staff page.

    5 P.M. 6 P.M. 6 P.M. 6:30 P.M. 6:30 P.M. 7 P.M.

    Applying for an editor position: Applications for editor positions during the fall or spring semesters are available twice each academic year and can be found here when posted. Applications for the Fall 2012 semester are closed, but check back for Spring 2013. Those who wish to apply are urged to publish pieces in the newspaper and contact current editors for shadowing.

    History of the Washington Square News:

    The Washington Square News is the official daily student newspaper of New York University and serves the NYU, Greenwich Village, and East Village communities. Founded as an independent newspaper in 1973, the WSN allows its undergraduate writers and photographers to cover campus and city news and continues to grow its strong body of award-winning journalists and photographers.

  • The WSN has a circulation of about 60,000 and can be found in over a hundred purple bins distributed throughout campus. It is published Monday through Thursday during the fall and spring semesters and online on Friday, with additional special issues published in the summer. The newspaper recently revamped its website during the Fall 2012 semester.

    Like few campus newspapers in the country, the paper is editorially and financially independent from the university and is solely responsible for selling advertisements to fund its production. The WSN, including its senior staff, is run solely by current undergraduate students and the business-division is largely student-operated as well.

    A Board of Directors comprised of alumni, NYU professors and working news media professionals serves as advisors to the paper. Board members have no control in the WSN's editorial policy or newsroom operations. Alumni of the newspaper are established and leading journalists in such news organizations as The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, NBC news, ABC news, Fox News, and USA Today.