How to Deal with the Expiration of FISA Surveillance Authority | National Review
Trump can turn to the courts.
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
10 Comments
The courts route is actually the right call here, and National Review is correct to flag it. FISA has been a captured tool for too long. The same apparatus that ran Crossfire Hurricane, that surveilled Carter Page on fabricated pretexts, that the Church Committee warned us about fifty years ago and we ignored, does not get to simply renew its own authority by default. If Trump uses the expiration as leverage to force structural reform before reauthorization, that is not obstruction of intelligence, that is constitutional hygiene. The executive has always had inherent Article II authority over foreign intelligence collection anyway. FISA was Congress trying to hem that in after Nixon. Fine. But the remedy for FBI abuse of that framework is not to hand them a cleaner version of the same blank check. Make them litigate for it. Sunlight is the only disinfectant that actually works on institutions this entrenched.
Me MAGA Me Big Brain!! Courts good idea!! Courts do what Congress too scared to do!!
FISA expire!! Big deal!! Trump find way!! He always find way!! That why Me vote Trump!!
Deep state use FISA to spy on Trump!! Me remember!! Me not forget!! Now Trump in charge and suddenly everyone worry about "authority"!! Where worry when they spy on Trump campaign!!
Kash Patel at FBI now!! He know what happen!! Courts plus Kash equal TRUTH coming out!!
Me have big IQ me know this!!
Not engaging with caveman FISA theory. Come back when you can make a sentence.
The "caveman FISA theory" means you don't actually have a point, doesn't it? Just say that next time, it's quicker.
Turning to the courts is a tactic, not a substitute for Congress doing its job. If FISA authority expires, that is not some technicality you can paper over with a friendly judge, and it is not the same thing as Congress affirmatively renewing surveillance power. If the legal basis is gone, the actual fix is legislation, not pretending a court can manufacture statutory authority out of thin air.
The permanent DC establishment hates that Kash Patel and Todd Blanche are finally cleaning up the mess at the FBI and DOJ. These "legal experts" were fine with the swamp trampling on our rights for years, but now that Trump is fixing it, they're suddenly worried about "statutory authority." Funny how that works.
the notion that this administration, which has staffed itself with people who believe the courts are an extension of the executive and the legislature, would ever actually respect a court ruling that went against them is simply precious. we watched the GOP primary voters shrug at Mar-a-Lago, watched them cheer on the Jan 6 defendants, watched them not care about the documents, and now we are supposed to believe that Todd Blanche, the attorney general who spent half his life trying to get the last president out of legal trouble, is suddenly going to decide that the "rule of law" is back on the menu. it is truly something how we keep having this conversation about norms and institutions as if the people in charge ever gave a single damn about them, ever, at all, for one second. the FISA authority, like every other authority, like every single law, exists only as long as it benefits them, and then it simply ceases to exist. it is not that complicated.
The expiration of FISA authority affects surveillance operations regardless of who is in the White House. This is not a partisan issue; it is an intelligence infrastructure issue. The mechanism described is irrelevant to the base rate of operational impact.
Surveillance of regular people is always a political issue when the same agencies get a blank check and the public gets the bill. "Intelligence infrastructure" is just fancy language for handing more power to the same crowd that never seems to lose it. If FISA expiration makes the spooks sweat, maybe that tells you the system was too broad to begin with.
"Turn to the courts."