Court’s NSA ruling leaves surveillance law in doubt

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit found in a 97-page ruling that the federal government’s practice of collecting domestic telephone data in bulk is illegal.

The opinion, issued by a three-judge panel, aligns with the view of many Democratic and Republican lawmakers who say the surveillance program conducted by the National Security Agency constitutes “illegal spying.”

Opposition to the program has prompted rare bipartisanship in both the House and Senate, where Democrats and Republicans have joined forces to co-author the USA Freedom Act, which would end bulk data collection by the NSA and require more stringent oversight of the agency’s surveillance practices.

Critics of the program say innocent Americans are being swept up in the NSA’s data collection even when they have no connection to terrorism.

The NSA’s surveillance program was passed by Congress and signed by President George W. Bush as part of the USA Patriot Act following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The aim of the legislation was to give the government adequate power to root out potential terrorist activity and to thwart new attacks.

Opposition to the program grew after former NSA contractor Edward Snowden leaked classified information two years ago that showed the agency was secretly collecting the phone records of millions of Americans and conducting widespread monitoring of Internet use.

“Clearly we must do everything we can to protect our country from the serious potential of another terrorist attack, but we can and must do so in a way that also protects the constitutional rights of the American people and maintains our free society,” Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said after Thursday’s court ruling. “We can do that without living in an Orwellian world where the government and private corporations know every telephone call that we make, every website we visit, every place we go.”

The House plans to take up the USA Freedom Act this month, and it’s expected to pass with bipartisan support.

But the legislation faces uncertainty in the Senate.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell last month introduced a five-year reauthorization of the program in its current form.

Shortly after the court ruling was released Thursday, he appeared on the Senate floor to declare that opponents of the program “have painted a distorted picture” of NSA’s surveillance practices.

McConnell argued that the information gathered from the program has been “critically important” in keeping the nation safe, contrary to critics who believe it has produced no useful information.

McConnell said the powers provided by the law are needed to combat the growing threat of Islamic State terrorists.

“The expiring provisions … are ideally suited for the terrorist threat we face in 2015,” McConnell said. “The NSA can find connections from known terrorists overseas and connect that to potential terrorists here in the United States.”

He is backed by Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr, R-N.C., and Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Tom Cotton of Arkansas.

Rubio, who is running for president, took to the Senate floor after the court ruling to defend the program, noting there are no documented cases of abuse by the NSA.

“There isn’t one example of that, not one,” Rubio said. “And if there is, that individual should be fired, prosecuted and put in jail. But the solution is not to get rid of a program at a time when we know that the risk of homegrown violent extremism is the highest it’s ever been.”

But other Republican and Democratic senators are stepping up pressure on McConnell to take up the NSA surveillance reform bill after it passes the House.

“We will not consent to any extension of this program,” said a statement from Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Mike Lee, R-Utah, the authors of the Senate NSA surveillance reform bill. “The House is poised to pass the bipartisan USA Freedom Act of 2015 next week, and the Senate should do the same.”