Yesterday, the House passed the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act (S. 139), giving the NSA authority to sweep up internet communications of foreigners and untold numbers of Americans without a warrant, and allowing the FBI to troll through the collected data without a warrant.
On Thursday, the House of Representatives is expected to vote on the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act of 2017, a terrible bill proposed by the Intelligence Committee that will not only extend Section 702’s vast surveillance powers, but also explicitly give the FBI and other law enforcement permission to sift through the data collected without a warrant.
Yesterday, we won twice. Amid the onslaught of bad news this year, it’s nice to see a couple of rays of hope.
The American Friends Service Committee and the Social Justice Initiative at University of Illinois Chicago hosted a “Resisting Surveillance” panel investigating surveillance programs in Chicago, and how communities are resisting these racist, invasive and dangerous practices.
On December 5th, the Berkeley City Council will consider an ordinance to allow public oversight and input before any new surveillance technology is acquired by the police.
YMC opposes CVE because it “targets Muslim youth for surveillance and thought policing based on vague and unfounded theories of radicalization.”
Residents are encouraged to turnout at the City Council meeting next week to stand up and speak up for surveillance transparency and oversight.
DRAD Joins 40 Groups to Warn Congress That Spy Bill Is Full Of Loopholes That Will Allow Continued Spying on Americans
The bill still allows the government to read emails, text messages, and other communications of Americans without a warrant.
Two piglets, near death before being rescued by two animal rights activists and nursed back to health. This may not seem like something within the FBI’s jurisdiction, yet the FBI is carrying out an interstate pursuit to find these two rescued piglets.
Is the Fourth Amendment, drafted in the 18th century, able to deal effectively with digital age technologies? That is the question being asked in a number of a number of legal cases, in a number of different contexts, and with surprising results.