for the past year the senate has engaged in a serious bipartisan effort to reform a controversial spying authority known as section 702 of the foreignli intelligence surveillance act fisa. i've never questioned section

702 is a valuable tool for collecting foreign intelligence. congress intention when we passed was clear as could be. section 702 is supposed to be used only for spying on foreigners abroad. instead, sadly it has enabled warrantless access to vast databases of america's private phone calls, text messages and e-mails. this powerful tool has been misused sadly in the united states to spy on protesters, journalists and even members of congress. last friday the house of representatives passed an alarming bill. it's misleadingly called reform intelligence and securing america act. rather than fixing the flaws in section 702, the house bill will

unnecessarily expand. rushing to pass the bill as is because section 702 well sunset on april 19th, but that is a false choice. no member should be fooled into believing section 702 will go dark and not be available to be used on april 20th if we do nothing.io we plan for this scenario providing clear statutory authority to continue surveillance on the existing orders from the foreign intelligence surveillance court after s section 702 expires. in fact, the department of justice already obtained a fresh one year certification from this court to continue section 702 surveillance through april of

2025. let me repeat that. the surveillance can continue through 2025 even if it nominally expires on friday. there is no need for the senate to swallow a house bill that expands rather than reforms section 702. the house bill contains several alarming and unnecessary expansions of the government's authority for spying. the bill could lobby government to force ordinary u.s. businesses with access to communications equipment like a wi-fi router to give the national securities access to their equipment. this would greatly expand the number and types of companies forced to assist the nsa with spying and increase warrantless collections of communications. another provision in the house bill would authorize the use of section 702. a i'm very concerned that would

allow future administrations to noncitizens a only applying for travel documents and subject to extensive background checks. expanding section 702 congress should reform this authority to protect americans privacy. unfortunately the reforms will have little or no impact. for example the bill would prohibit what's known as evidence of a a crime only. this would have prevented the fbi from accessing americans communications and only two cases out of more than 200,000 searches on u.s. persons in 2022. other changes with existing approval requirements but with these limited and placed the fbi still conducted an average of more than 500 warrantless searches every day in 2022. mr. president, i will try to

make this as basic as i can. after 9/11 we were seriously concerned about the security of the united states as we should have been. we established authorities in this government to keep us safe but had a problem we had to reckon with the end of the problem was this. despite the great threat we faced we also had a great responsibility to this publication. the constitution of the united states. so we created a section 702 and said we would use it to have queries and surveillance of foreigners in foreign lands but nott americans. diwhy did we draw the distincti? because the constitution makes it clear before the government can listen to my phone call, read my text or e-mail in this country since i am a u.s. citizen, they have to have a warrant which gives approval for that search and they have to go atto court to get the warrant fr the purpose remained the

exception for foreigners and foreign countries but we said we were trying to protect from this kind of surveillance without complying to the constitution. over the years, sadly the application of the law was not very good. at one point there were 3.4 million inquiries of american citizens and one year. the agencies of our government said we will do better. we won't be invading the privacy of individual citizens. we will do better and they did better but there's still in outrageous and unacceptable level of the misuse of the authority to have surveillance into the privacy of individual american citizens and that's why i rise today after the long history, spying on americans without the constitutional warrant is required congress should not rely on internal executive branch procedures as a

substitute. if the government wants to spy on my private communications or of any american, they should be required to get approval from the judge just f as our founding fathers intended in writing the constitution. a bipartisan amendment would require the government to obtain a warrant before searching the section 702 databases for the communications of citizens but this critical reform narrowly failed on a type of 212 to 212. i want to offer a narrow amendment that would require the government to obtain a warrant in a small fraction of the situations where it actually wants to read or listen to the communications of american citizens. the vast majority of warrantless searches on u.s. persons do not return any results less than 1.6% with any measurable

results. based on recent statistics that would amount to just 80 times a month that the fbi or other agencies are engaged in the surveillance would have to ask to protect the inquiries and investigations into private communications of american citizens. i sat through numerous classified briefingsn on the section 702 and listened carefully to the government's concerns about having to obtain this approval to review the contents of the communications. at the bipartisan amendment accounts for these concerns by providing exceptions to the requirement for emergencies or cybersecurity attacks where they can consent to the search. there will not be any delays jeopardizing the national security. what it will not allow are the expeditions in which there are

no unusual circumstances and the government doesn't have probable cause. this pragmatic approach respecting the constitution will safeguard american privacy and still preserve section 702 is critical value for collecting foreign intelligence and protecting national security. the chair of the independent privacy and civil liberties oversight board conducted a thorough review based on the classified record and reached the same conclusion. congress has the responsibility to the american people to get tthis right. i recognize the importance of section 702 but we should not have rubberstamped the bill wherela it's already authorized until april 25. i want to respect the need for section 702 but i'm sworn to respect the need to follow this constitution without critical changespr to improve the bill i cannot support it. the senator from texas.

>> i'm glad i was on the floor to hear the distinguished senator from illinois comments of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. this is perhaps the most important flaw that most americans have never heard of before. but here we are debating that and the house having passed a bill and sent it over to us it's our responsibility now to consider that bill. we all want to protect the privacy and constitutional rights of american citizens that's nonnegotiable. i agree with of the senator on that point and i think we all should agree. but the fact of the matter is the house bill is a reform bill. it's not section 702 as it is

currently operating. this provides numerous guardrails, accountability measures and other measures that i believe will limit if not eliminate the opportunities to abuse this authority to the detriment of american citizens and rather i believe this law must be passed in order to protect those same people. it's really important for the american people to understand it is only available against foreigners overseas. only foreigners overseas. if you want to get access to any information even a foreigner here in the united states for an american citizen or permanent resident you've got to go to court and do what the senator

says. we are not talking only about crimes the crime of espionage, we are talking about foreign adversaries collecting information on american citizens that they can use. ransom where attacks through cybercrime, and the list goes on and on. but i think a fair reading provides the sort of belt and suspenders approach that we need to reform the current practice because of the very abuses that our friend from illinois mentions.mo at midnight the most valuable

intelligence tool that's available to policymakers including the president of the united states will be eliminated and what i'm talking about his isadditional collection of that information because in fact the very telecommunications companies that we depend on and compelled to participate in the collection process will refuse to cooperate if they are not compelled to do so as a matter of federal law. we know that because to protest that cooperation and that compelling cooperation we need to think about not only what the program is now, but the blindness we will incur in the

future and of the amendments from the senator from illinois and i certainly support the right of every senator to offer amendments to try to change the bill as they see fit. every single day information acquired through section 70 to protect us our national security missions and i want to mention a few of them but think about the moment when president biden gets his intelligence bree each day that is called the daily brief. it's a compilation of the most sensitive intelligence that's important for the president is the commander-in-chief to have access to approximately 60% of the information contained in the president's daily brief is derived from section 702 so unquestionably it is a critical

resource to protect the country not just for theco commander-in-chief but other policymakers including members of congress who happened to be on oversight committees for example which i'm privileged to be. one of the first things that comes to mind when we think about section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act because it applies only to rvforeigners overseas who are a threat to national security and so identified the first thing we think of is counterterrorism and it's easy to see why because this authority was first created in the wake of 9/11 the worst terrorist attack america has ever experienced. citizens killed that day. in 2008 with threats posed by terrorist groups and in the years since it has helped combat

terrorism and prevent further attacks on american soil. last year for example, section 702 helped the fbi disrupt a terrorist attack on critical infrastructure sites in the united states. in 2022 the data supported the planning of the u.s. military operation that resulted in the death of the leader devices, the sequel to al qaeda. of the tigger wrist organization that has designs not only on its adversaries in the middle east but on americans as well. in 2020 information acquired helped thwart a terrorist attack on the facility in the middle east and the list goes on and on. the point is section 702 is vital to the counterterrorism missions but it's applications

extend far more broadly than just one counterterrorism. it's also a critical tool in the fight against fentanyl which took the lives of 71,000 americans last year alone. i've been to six high schools in texas where grieving parents say their child took a pill that they thought was relatively innocuous, percocet, xanax. i know we wish our kids would nevers take things like that but they certainly didn't think they were taking a pill that would kill them but that is what happened because it was a counterfeit bill that looked like a regular pharmaceutical drug but it was leased with fentanyl and it took their life. 702 is a critical tool in combating fentanyl which is a leading cause of death for americans between the age of 18 and 45. that is an incredible statistic. in one example the community obtained information under 702

that the foreign actor supplied a pill press machinery to a mexican drug cartel to make fentanyl which is what happens the precursorspp come from chin, they make their way into mexico, they are combined and then processed through an industrial capacity pill press to make it look like a normal pharmaceutical and then smuggled into the united states. that machinery, that the pill presses capable of producing millions of pills not per day but per hour. so we know that this could produce millions of lethal doses in one hour. at the good news is that this

information was uncovered thanks to 702 and it was acted upon and the pill press and other equipment that were seized before we could end up in a cartel drug lab. but this type of success story is not isolated. last year 70% of the cia's illicit synthetic drug disruptions stemmed from information gathered through section 702. i know we think of the cia as our intelligence agency, and it is one of our principal intelligence agencies but one of the missions is a counter drug commission and they were able to use section 7022 disrupt 70% with 70% of their synthetic drug disruptions just last year alone. this intelligence gathering capability isli vital to the

efforts to stop fentanyl and save american lives and there's no question that the fight against the fentanyl would take a major step backwards if 702 went dark and i want to reiterate our friend from illinois that suggested there's no worry about missing the deadline for reauthorization. it is true that currently collected information could be queried and to look for information that's already been collected. there is n no way the telecommunications companies from whom the information collected and a federal law controlling them to do so. some have sued and claimed they shouldn't be required to

cooperate. intelligence professionals uncover information about far more than just terrorism and drug trafficking. a section 702 also helped the united states government to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. 70% of the communities successful disruptions of weapons of mass destruction in the past few years. it also helps disrupt the efforts to recruit spies or people they try to recruit here in the united states. it helps identify and respond to cyber threats. in 2021 you may remember the colonial pipeline ransom attack where cyber criminals froze the

computer systems of colonial pipeline and shut it down with a major supplier of gasoline and diesel for the east coast and they said we are not going to unlock that network until you pay the ransom. with section 702, because the masterminds of this effort were overseas primarily in russia that we were able to use 702 to identify those actors that allowed the fbi to connect the dots and to dismantle that criminal network. every day america's intelligence professionals rely on section 702 to gather timely and actionable intelligence to keep the country safe. while there's no question and i haven't n heard any of our membs here in the senate to say that

702 is not helpfulhe or necessay but they are concerned about privacy, and i am to. it protects americans from unlawful searches and seizures by the fbi and local police department. law enforcement cannot search your home or monitor your communications without going to a court and showing probable cause that a crime is being committed. but there's a lot of confusion about where that might apply in this context because it's not a

crime in the sense that we are our criminal law ordinarily apply in america. what we are talking about his foreign espionage and hostile activities that had notcu yet occurred. we don't do anything to try to prevent crimes from happening. we punish crimes once they occur after we've investigated to them and prosecuted them but we don't want another 9/11 to occur. we don't want innocent americans to be killed in a terrorist attack and it's not okay to say we will wait until the terrorists commit that act and then try to find them and punish them. we want to stop it and that's where 702 is so important. and it's not true that it gives

the authority to the intelligence community to target americans. the senator from illinois mentioned a number of times where there was inappropriate and frankly illegal use of this information into those individuals in some instances have been disciplined in some have been prosecuted and that's appropriate, but what the house bill does is takes for example fbi rules and regulations around the use of 702 and codifies them in other words it's not a discretionary or a matter of agency, it's a matter of federal law o a long list of reforms tht this bill includes that would make up that sort of activity far less likely. i say far less likely because i

doubt you could passld any law r rule that would prevent somebody from abusing them but we sure want to make sure that we minimize the possibility and we ought to make sure the people who do so are held accountable and that is what this reform bill that passed does. again, this bill allows the intelligence committee and department of justice to obtain information on foreigners located outside of the united states. so, here's one of theth questios were one of the issues posed by our friends who have a different view on this and that is because whent a foreigner talks to yous a person, that should ascend off allflashing red signs or at leat yellow lights but federal courts at least three federal courts including the foreign intelligence surveillance court

and two other federal circuit courts have held that there is no violation of the fourth amendment of unlawful searches and seizures of americans if that is incidental collection, incidental to the authorized collection of foreign communications of people overseas. and how is itd that we could possibly expect anybody to get a warrant when we don't even know who these individuals are talking to until after the fact? what i happens then is very important and that is if any agency wants to go a step further and ask for more information about the american citizenry existing law requires they get a warrant. the foreign intelligence surveillance court, article three judges supported by the chief justice of the united

states supreme court,su and to t a warrant based on probable cause that this individual is a, aiding and abetting a foreign adversary or has committed a crime like espionage. but the fourth amendment to the constitution does not apply to foreigners who live abroad where this issue raises heightened concerns is the incidental collection which i mentioned a moment ago that is of a foreign target who lives abroad and is communicating on u.s. soil like a legal permanent resident and professionals receive both sides of the conversation. 702 complies withe the amendmen.

the second circuit court of appeals in 2019 considered that very question. the court determined those who reasonably appear to be a potential threat to the united states. the court added once it is reflected in those e-mails it doesn't need to seek a warrant to continue to collect e-mails between that person once it learns those individuals are united states citizens or permanent residences were are located in the united states but as i said, once this incidental collection has occurred that the law enforcement agencies like the fbi want to go further, they have to get a warrant before they can collect other information.

that's a direct investigation of that person and it requires a warrant and probable cause. in terms of incidental collection is not a novel concept for example when a law enforcement officer executes a search warrant. the second circuit, the ninth circuit into tenth circuit looked into this matter and the eastern district of new york as well. every court that's considered the program found that it

complies. we ought to go ahead and lay on the table with a lack of trust howll the rules are actually applied and practiced. a part of that justifiable concern is based upon abuses in the past. and those ought to be investigated and prosecuted and heldug accountable. but what the house has done is proposed a reform bill that reduces of lots eliminates the

chance of making the same sorts of actions. it's as far as you can go without destroying section 702 to make sure the privacy rights into the constitutional rights of american citizens are protected. while at the same time making sure that we can maintain this flow of valuable foreign intelligence to help protect the american people. this legislation codifies reforms that are implemented by the fbi a couple of years ago which reduced noncompliance to about 2% and these reforms have already proven to work as i said that the department of justice conducted a review last year and

found 98% of the fbi's inquiries were now fully compliant with these new and enhanced requirements and those would be codified into law under this bill. so i appreciate the sensitivity that all of us feel about the constitutional rights of american citizens. none of us want to allow any violation of the rights. we are sworn to uphold and defend the constitution and i take, i am confident each of us want to be and boiled to that oath but at the same time we have the responsibility to protect the american people from the sort of threats that i've described and allowing 7022 expire tomorrow night would simply blind not only the president of the united states but us as policyholders and people responsible for protecting the great nation

would blind us to threats that future collection under 702 could provide because there is no way that these telecommunication companies were going to cooperate absent a federal lawop compelling them to so who would be the winner in all this? let's call out a few winners in this if it goes dark. china, russia and iran. it would limit our ability to understand the threats we are facing here in the homeland before it's too late. so there's a reason why the intelligence community calls section 702 of the crown jewels of their ability to protect and defend and it's absolutely imperative that congressat

reauthorize section 702 with these reforms before it collapses tomorrow night. i'm optimistic that working together we can get the job done. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum i want to thank my colleagues from texas though we may disagree on some aspects of this important law, once again these may be professional and thorough hpresentation. i hope that those that are following the debate understand it because it is complicated to understand and even to explain. a couple i would like to express the point of view on the senator from texas comments. number one i'm in favor of keeping section 702, no question about it, when it comes to its

initial purpose we still needed to keep america safe. and in many different aspects. the most recent i received from the drug enforcement administration suggest over 100,000 victims a year it's the deadliest narcotic there's at least two cartels. do we want to use our capacity to give them to that a business model to try to find out more information. it comes down to a practical question let's assume for a moment that we decide we want to

know if someone is involved in one of these cartels is making a drop in the united states. we can use 702 because we are dealing with foreigners in foreign land. what can we do if the information they disclose in the conversation includes reference and what right do we have to go into further and questioning involvement in the cartel that's when we ran into the fourth amendment as far as i'm concerned, and it's a serious question as to whether or not we can ask any questions about the text, e-mails or phone conversations. names came up in the conversation that we intercepted as a member of the cartel. that's where wert had probably a difference of opinion, how far

can we go. i believe we are going into an anniversary as to what that americans involvement is in the cartel the fourth amendment applies. at that point we need a warrant. asked if the senator would like to comment on what i've said so far. >> mr. president, i appreciate the opportunity to engage my friend and colleague the distinguished chairman of the senate judiciary committee and distinguished lawyer in his own right. this is his house, but i appreciate the question becausei i think it actually may be there is a nuance that either i misstated my position because i am of the same mind you are when it comes to an american citizen whose mentioned in a communication with the foreign

actor because this is designed to deal only with foreign actors. what i was referring to was incidental communication between then foreign actor and the u.s. person and it can only be a legal permanent resident so when that's incidental collection when there's that contact between a target, foreign target and the american citizen that is considered to be incidental collection and no court has said it violates the amendment but i agree with of the senator that if in fact there is a mention in the law enforcement agencies want more about that, they have to get a warrant and go to court and establish probable cause in order to get that information because that is what it is designed to protect.

i hope i've understood the senator's position. >> i hope i understand your position as well because we have just reached a point of agreement. the question is where do we go from d here if they name an american citizen that is incidental. if they decide that they want to explore conversations, phone conversations, text and e-mails of death named american citizen, i think we both agree at that point we have reached the fourth amendment protection that requires a warrant. all i've tried to do with my amendment is to condition the situation i just described to you to be protectedaw in the law with three exceptions. an emergency situation, i mean, you can imagine and i can after living through 9/11 and others sometimes you have to move quickly and even the fourth amendment may be questionable and at the second part of the

cybersecurity that may be part of it and to be protected for fear that something is happening to them if they don't want it to happen so they asked the agency of the government to go forward to inquire as to that foreigner because they want for their own protection. those are in my amendment as well so we are close to an agreement, i don't know i won't presume that but what we've said so far is -- >> if the senator from illinois would permit me to respond. ..that was on a tide vote.

so this bill, this bill lapses tomorrow at midnight. it's obvious to me that we are not going to be able to change this bill in a way that then could go to the house and get picked up and passed before midnight tomorrow night and i'm not sure the house can pass another bill even with these

amendments. i don't question the good will and the intentions of the senator from illinois, i think he wants to do what i want to do which is to protect our country and to protect the rights of american citizens but i think as a technical matter that the exceptions he has will swallow the rule of his -- his amendment would establish but perhaps even more basically by passage of time we permit to get to the president's desk in time to get the authorities in effect. there's no question that our world is more dangerous now than any other time in the recent past. i would say since world war ii. i don't think we could risk going dark by having this authority lapse on -- on future collection either for theec benefit of the commander in chief, the president of the united states or the rest of us. i want to thank the senator for

giving me a chance to answer a few questions and present my point of view. >> mr. president, i would like to thank to my colleague of texas. this came dangerously close to a senate debate on the senate floor, bipartisan senate, happens so seldom, those who witness it should call their friends and seriously, i respect the senator from texas. i respect hisd presentation. thank you for answering the questions. i yield the floor. >> attorneys and former president donald trump's new york city trial selected 12 jurors to determine the former president's guilt or innocence. lawyers for the defense and the prosecution still need to select r the trial. during this third d of jury selection the presiding judge dismissed a jur who said she felt intimidated with some information was made public and later excused another juror

afteprecutors say he may not have disclosed prior with the law, opening statements inhe trial could begin as earlys monday. this will be the fst time ever that a fme u.s. president is the defendant in a criminal trial. american history tv saturdays on c-span2, exploring people and events that tell the american story. at 5:10 p.m. eastern martin luther king the third commemorates 56th anniversary to his father's april 4th assassination at the national rights museum. at 7:00 p.m. eastern american history tv series congress investigates with historic congressional investigation that led the changes in policy and law. this weekend we will look back at the 1950's which explores communist infiltrated with state department, the army and other federal agencies and at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures in

history, north carolina central university history professor jasmín discuss activism in historic black colleges in north carolina. exploring the american story. watch american history tv saturdays on c-span2, find full schedule on your program guide or watch online any time at c-span.org/history. sunday on q&a zachary and christian hanson discus their four-part netflix docu series, american conspiracy, events surrounding the death of freelance journalist danny in 1971. >> it is called the octopus because he start looking into one dc area, 1980's scandal

and takes moment into the scandal and surprise and bcci, the same kind of players, nefarious, you know, players, their names are popping up here. >> the complexity of the story makes it really difficult, names and the access makes it really hard and so there was just a lot of obstacles towards being able to both find out what happened and being able to tell the story of what happened. >> filmmaker zachary and christian hansen on c-span's q&a. you can listen to q&a in our podcasts in the c-span now app. next discussion with congressional lawmakers about european security and aid to ukraine with