Overview

Title

To reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.

ELI5 AI

H.R. 7320, called the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, is a plan that tries to make sure the people who collect and use secret information do it carefully and fairly, like making sure there are more rules and people watching them to keep them honest, and it wants them to be honest about what they're doing.

Summary AI

H.R. 7320, known as the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, aims to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 by introducing stricter oversight and procedures for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in conducting queries related to United States persons. It includes new requirements for prior approval, mandatory audits, and training for FBI personnel, while prohibiting certain political appointees from being involved in the approval process. The bill enhances accountability, transparency, and reporting for intelligence activities, seeks to better protect civil liberties, and aims to ensure the responsible use of surveillance powers.

Published

2024-02-13
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2024-02-13
Package ID: BILLS-118hr7320ih

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
23
Words:
15,797
Pages:
83
Sentences:
294

Language

Nouns: 4,463
Verbs: 1,123
Adjectives: 765
Adverbs: 166
Numbers: 568
Entities: 820

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.36
Average Sentence Length:
53.73
Token Entropy:
5.41
Readability (ARI):
29.47

AnalysisAI

The bill titled "Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act" seeks to overhaul the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978. This legislation aims to introduce changes that tighten the rules on how U.S. government agencies conduct surveillance, aiming to bolster accountability and safeguard privacy. Presented to the House of Representatives in early 2024, this bill reflects ongoing concerns about surveillance practices and the balance between national security and civil liberties.

General Summary of the Bill

The "Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act" proposes comprehensive reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Key components include:

  • Restrictions on FBI Searches: The bill seeks to limit who within the FBI can authorize searches involving U.S. persons, curbing potential misuse by prohibiting political appointees from partaking in this approval process.

  • Audit and Reporting Requirements: It demands more rigorous audits of surveillance-related searches, especially those concerning U.S. citizens, and mandates reporting by agencies about search practices.

  • Criminal Penalties and Transparency: There are new criminal penalties for unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information, as well as requirements for public declassification of certain documents within specific timeframes.

  • Establishment of a Reform Commission: A new body will be tasked with evaluating FISA's effectiveness and suggesting further reforms, including reviews and procedural updates, over a five-year period.

Significant Issues

The bill poses several notable challenges and concerns:

  • Complexity in Implementation: The numerous layers and details required for compliance could create bureaucratic challenges, potentially delaying necessary actions in urgent situations. The complexity of appointing amici curiae, for instance, could hinder judicial efficiency.

  • Increased Administrative Burdens: Mandated annual reporting and mandatory audits may place considerable organizational stress on involved agencies, such as the FBI, which could divert resources from their primary operational tasks.

  • Proportionality of Penalties: Enhanced penalties for offenses might be seen as disproportionate, particularly when intent to harm is unclear, prompting questions about fairness and justice within the legal framework.

  • Clarity on Definitions: Some terms, such as 'commercially-available data' or what constitutes 'media sources,' remain vaguely defined, potentially leading to interpretive challenges and inconsistent applications of the law.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

For the general public, this bill represents a mixed bag of stronger protections and potential drawbacks. On the positive side, the reforms can reassure citizens about their data privacy and civil liberties, as the amendments aim to restrict surveillance overreach and ensure accountability. This focus on transparency and stronger oversight aligns well with public sentiment desiring checks on government powers.

However, the intricate procedures and increased accountability expectations could slow down law enforcement operations, especially in time-sensitive national security contexts. This might lead to inefficiencies that could affect the public indirectly by delaying the response to potential threats.

Specific Stakeholders:

  • Law Enforcement Agencies: While the enforcement of these new rules might ensure better accountability, it will also likely increase the workload for agencies like the FBI, whose operational processes will become more complex and resource-intensive.

  • Judicial System: The requirement for specific judges to handle cases and the use of expert advisors (amicus curiae) may strain judicial resources. Still, these reforms could enhance the quality of judicial oversight, ensuring fair treatment in intelligence-related cases.

  • Privacy Advocates: Individuals and groups focused on civil liberties may view the bill's stricter surveillance limits and requirement for disclosure positively. It signals a move towards more ethical surveillance practices.

In conclusion, while the "Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act" aims to address concerns over privacy and surveillance, its practical implementation could encounter challenges. Balancing effective national security operations with the protection of civil liberties remains a nuanced endeavor, demanding careful consideration from all stakeholders involved.

Financial Assessment

The Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act includes several financial references and implications related to the amendment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. This commentary will delve into these financial aspects, outlining potential areas of concern and relation to identified issues.

Financial Allocations and Penalties

One prominent financial reference within the bill is found in Section 15, which dictates increased penalties for civil violations. If a violation occurs, and the aggrieved party is a United States person, the legislation proposes damages of $10,000 or $1,000 per day for each day the violation continues. For other aggrieved persons, the penalty is $1,000 or $100 per day. These significant financial penalties underscore the bill's intent to deter violations and enhance accountability.

Impact on Resource Allocation

The requirement for transcriptions of hearings and related records in Section 8 could potentially strain resources. The bill mandates that all hearings be transcribed, but it does not detail the budgetary allowances or resources allocated to fulfill this requirement. This creates a potential risk of unintended spending issues due to unanticipated resource demands. The lack of specified funding may lead to practical challenges, as the need for additional staff or technology to manage these tasks could arise.

Mandatory Reporting and Administrative Burdens

The annual reporting requirements, particularly noted in Sections 11 and 12, impose significant administrative obligations on the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). While these measures aim to increase transparency and oversight, they might divert resources from other priority areas. The administrative burdens associated with generating these detailed reports could lead to increased operational expenses that are not explicitly covered by additional funding allocations in the bill.

Funding for the FISA Reform Commission

Section 18(c) establishes the FISA Reform Commission with an open-ended authorization for appropriations. The commission is empowered with extensive duties, which may necessitate substantial funding. However, the bill authorizes appropriations "to the extent and in such amounts as specifically provided in advance in appropriations acts," leaving the total potential cost ambiguous. This authorization raises concerns about possible bureaucratic expansion and the efficiency of newly introduced processes, aligning with the worry that the commission could become a costly and cumbersome entity.

Conclusion

The financial aspects of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act are an integral part of its broader implications, affecting penalties, resource allocations, and administrative operations. While these measures support the bill’s intent to reform intelligence practices, they also introduce potential challenges related to budgetary constraints, resource allocation, and efficiency. It is crucial for lawmakers to consider these financial implications to ensure that the bill’s objectives are met without overburdening existing systems or creating unnecessary fiscal strain.

Issues

  • The requirement for congressional consent before the FBI can conduct certain queries for the purpose of defensive briefings (Section 2) may unintentionally hinder the timely flow of intelligence. This could be problematic in urgent situations where rapid response is crucial.

  • The provisions allowing the FBI to bypass certain procedures with 'waiver authority' granted by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) lack clear criteria for compliance outcomes (Section 2), which could lead to vague implementations and possible misuse.

  • Increased criminal penalties for offenses under FISA (Section 13) might raise concerns about proportionality and clarity, particularly regarding communications or disclosures that may not have a clearly harmful intent.

  • The process for appointing amici curiae in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court reform (Section 5) is complex and may lead to delays, potentially affecting the efficiency of the court.

  • The requirement for transcriptions of hearings and related records (Section 8) raises concerns about resource allocation, as there is no mention of the budget or resources allocated for these tasks, which might lead to unintended spending issues.

  • The provision for mandatory declassification review within 180 days (Section 7) could be impractical depending on the complexity and volume of documents, leading to challenges in meeting this deadline.

  • Requirements for annual reporting by the FBI (Section 12) might significantly increase administrative burdens without clear benefits, potentially diverting resources from other critical areas.

  • The amendments prohibiting the use of politically derived information and press reports in FISA applications could lead to interpretation challenges due to unclear definitions and potential reliance on such information in certain contexts (Section 6).

  • The establishment of a FISA Reform Commission with extensive powers could lead to bureaucratic expansion, and there is concern over the efficiency and necessity of its implementation (Section 18).

  • The section on foreign intelligence surveillance court reform requires the same judge to hear extension applications, introducing potential delays in case of unavailability (Section 5), despite a provision for exigent circumstances.

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section of the Act provides its short title, which is the "Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act".

2. Query procedure reform Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The proposed reforms in this section limit who within the FBI can authorize searches related to U.S. persons, prohibit political appointees from approving these FBI searches, and require audits of these searches by the Department of Justice. The reforms also introduce new training and approval requirements for certain sensitive searches and mandate that Congress be informed about searches involving members of Congress or conducted without consent for defensive briefings.

3. Limitation on use of information obtained under section 702 Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section amends rules regarding how the FBI can use information obtained under Section 702, prohibiting them from conducting searches specifically to find evidence of a crime unless the search could help prevent a threat to life or is necessary for legal proceedings. Additionally, it restricts the FBI from using certain unprocessed information in their investigations unless the person is part of an active national security investigation, with exceptions for urgent situations or when assisting other federal agencies.

4. Targeting decisions under section 702 Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

Congress emphasizes that the U.S. intelligence community is prohibited from targeting U.S. citizens for foreign intelligence collection under section 702, requiring a court order for exceptions. The Department of Justice must conduct annual reviews and audits to ensure compliance and report these to Congress, with agencies certifying they haven't improperly targeted U.S. persons.

5. Foreign intelligence surveillance court reform Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section introduces reforms to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, including requiring the same judge to decide on extensions for surveillance orders targeting Americans when possible. It also mandates the use of expert advisors called amicus curiae to help the court with certain cases and requires appointing attorneys to review applications targeting Americans to ensure there are no flaws.

6. Application for an order under the foreign intelligence surveillance act Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The document outlines amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, requiring sworn statements for factual claims in applications, prohibiting the use of politically derived and press report information without proper identification and corroboration, and adjusting the timelines and justifications needed for extending surveillance orders, especially concerning U.S. persons and foreign powers.

7. Public disclosure and declassification of certain documents Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section amends part of a law to add a requirement that the declassification review of certain documents must be completed as soon as possible, but no later than 180 days after the review begins.

8. Transcriptions of proceedings Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines requirements for transcribing hearings and storing related records with their corresponding applications or orders. It also mandates notifying Congress about certain transcripts related to proceedings before intelligence courts, and providing access to declassified documents.

9. Audit of FISA compliance by inspector general Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section requires the Inspector General of the Department of Justice to submit reports to Congress on how well the FBI follows rules for using certain search practices under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. These reports will evaluate the FBI's compliance, improvements made, and suggest ways to be even better, especially concerning searches involving U.S. citizens.

10. Accuracy and completeness of applications Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

This section mandates that applicants for certain legal permissions must certify that they've informed the Attorney General of any information that might question the accuracy of their applications. It also requires applicants to disclose any information that could prove someone is innocent or contradict the requested legal findings, with these rules applying to applications submitted 120 days after the act becomes law.

11. Annual report of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines changes to the reporting requirements for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), mandating that the FBI's Director submits an annual report to specific government committees about their queries involving U.S. persons' data under a particular surveillance program. This report must include count-based details and estimates regarding various types of queries conducted, and it should be made publicly available after a review for declassification.

12. Adverse personnel actions for Federal Bureau of Investigation Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section requires the FBI Director to report annually to certain congressional committees about disciplinary actions related to improper use of certain surveillance data. It also mandates that the FBI implement measures to hold its executive leadership accountable for ensuring compliance with certain legal procedures, with regular briefings to Congress on these efforts.

13. Criminal penalties for violations of FISA Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section of the bill outlines criminal penalties for unauthorized disclosure of information related to electronic surveillance and certain classified information involving U.S. persons. It increases penalties for these offenses, allowing fines or imprisonment up to 10 years for certain offenses, and establishes federal jurisdiction if the offender was a U.S. officer or employee.

709. Penalties for unauthorized disclosure Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

A person can be punished under this section if they knowingly share or misuse classified information, especially if it harms the United States or benefits a foreign government. Such actions can result in a fine, a prison sentence of up to 8 years, or both, especially if the person was a government employee at the time.

14. Contempt power of FISC and FISC–R Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The text outlines amendments to existing laws to grant the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (FISC-R) the power to address contempt, similar to U.S. district courts. It also requires annual reporting on how often these courts use their contempt authority, along with a description of each instance.

15. Increased penalties for civil actions Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

This section amends penalties for civil violations under section 110, increasing damages to at least $10,000 for U.S. persons or $1,000 for others, depending on the circumstances. It also requires agency heads to report violations to Congress and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which will keep a list of violators.

Money References

  • (a) Increased penalties.—Subsection (a) of section 110 is amended to read as follows: “(a) actual damages, but not less than liquidated damages equal to the greater of— “(1) if the aggrieved person is a United States person, $10,000 or $1,000 per day for each day of violation; or “(2) for any other aggrieved person, $1,000 or $100 per day for each day of violation;”.

110A. Reporting requirements for civil actions Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

If a court determines that someone has broken the law in a civil case under section 110, the agency they work for must report to Congress about the actions taken against them. Additionally, the agency must give the person's name to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which will keep a list of such individuals.

16. Accountability standards for incidents relating to queries conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section requires the FBI Director to establish clear rules with consequences for improper searches of U.S. persons' data, with zero tolerance for intentional misconduct and increasing penalties for mistakes. It also mandates reporting these rules to Congress within 90 days and includes annual reports on any disciplinary actions for three years, involving both intelligence and judiciary committees.

17. Removal or suspension of federal officers for misconduct before foreign intelligence surveillance court Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section explains that if a United States Government officer or employee intentionally behaves improperly during proceedings at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court or its Court of Review, they could face severe consequences such as suspension without pay or even losing their job.

18. Reports and other matters Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The text describes the creation of a commission, called the "FISA Reform Commission," which will review and suggest updates to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The commission will include members from various government departments and Congress, and will have powers to hold hearings and require information from federal agencies, aiming to ensure both effective intelligence operations and the protection of privacy and civil liberties. The commission will submit a final report with its findings and recommendations within five years.

19. Extension of certain authorities; sunset Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section extends certain authorities granted by the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 by changing the expiration date from December 31, 2023, to five years after the new Act, the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, is enacted. Additionally, five years after the enactment of this Act, section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 will revert to its wording as it was before this new Act was passed.

20. Amendments to the foreign intelligence surveillance act of 1978 Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section explains that when this Act changes or removes parts of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, it will be automatically understood as an amendment to that Act. Additionally, any changes made by this Act, such as adding, removing, or altering sections, will also update the table of contents of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to reflect these changes.

21. Information Submission Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The Director of National Intelligence, with input from the Attorney General, may send information to certain congressional committees about how law enforcement and intelligence agencies purchase commercially-available data on U.S. citizens.