Obama's Fisa Law: Accusations And Implications

Former US President Barack Obama has been accused of breaking the law on FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) by abusing his powers to conduct mass surveillance on American citizens. Obama initially opposed the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretapping policy, but as president, he renewed the Patriot Act and supported certain government surveillance programs, which led to criticism from civil liberties advocates.

In 2013, leaks by ex-NSA contractor Edward Snowden revealed that the NSA, under the Obama Administration, had engaged in mass surveillance of American and foreign citizens. While Obama promised reforms and greater transparency, his administration continued to seek reauthorization of telephone metadata collection.

In 2017, a declassified FISA report revealed that the NSA, during the Obama Administration, had routinely violated the Fourth Amendment rights of Americans. The report also detailed instances of the FBI illegally sharing raw surveillance data with private entities. These incidents have raised concerns about the abuse of FISA by the Obama-era FBI and the need for stronger oversight to protect the civil liberties of Americans.

Obama's FBI abused the FISA process to target and spy on Trump's 2016 election campaign

On December 9, 2019, the Justice Department's Inspector General released a report on the review of four FISA applications and the origins of the FBI investigation into President Trump's 2016 campaign. The report revealed that the FBI had launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign based on thin suspicions. It was also clear that the evidence produced by the investigation was consistently exculpatory. Despite this, the investigation and surveillance were pushed forward throughout the campaign and into President Trump's administration.

In their rush to obtain and maintain FISA surveillance of Trump campaign associates, FBI officials misled the FISA court, omitted critical exculpatory facts, and suppressed or ignored information about the reliability of their principal source. The Inspector General found these actions to reflect a clear abuse of the FISA process by a small group of now-former FBI officials.

The report confirms that the Obama-era FBI abused the FISA process to target and spy on President Trump's 2016 election campaign. This abuse of authority and manipulation of probable cause to obtain FISA warrants is a serious concern and a poor reflection on the standards of one of America's most well-established law enforcement organizations.

The ensuing criminal investigation will further address the motives and intent of bad actors within the Obama-era FBI, and those responsible should be held accountable. This incident underscores the importance of protecting American citizens' Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Obama's reversal on privacy protection

Barack Obama's stance on privacy protection underwent a significant shift during his presidency, sparking widespread criticism from various quarters. Initially, as a senator, Obama vehemently opposed the Patriot Act, arguing that it infringed on the rights of American citizens by allowing extensive searches without warrants. However, in 2011, as president, he renewed the Patriot Act, specifically provisions enabling roaming wiretaps and government searches of business records. This U-turn attracted criticism from members of Congress, who felt the provisions fell short of adequately curbing excessive searches.

The controversy surrounding Obama's stance on privacy protection intensified with the revelations of Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor, in 2013. Snowden disclosed the existence of a global surveillance system that collected information on both American and foreign citizens. Obama's administration initially defended the NSA's mass surveillance programs, claiming transparency and asserting that the agency had not monitored the phone calls and emails of American citizens. However, following Snowden's admission to leaking classified documents, Obama attempted to downplay the issue to avoid complicating the Department of Justice's investigation.

In a January 2014 speech, Obama promised increased restrictions on data collection, including the requirement of court approval for telephone record searches. He also acknowledged the dangers posed by NSA surveillance to civil liberties. Nevertheless, his speech was criticized for its vagueness and failure to provide sufficient safeguards for civil liberties.

The controversy surrounding Obama's reversal on privacy protection extended beyond domestic issues. In January 2014, Obama addressed the German people, acknowledging the damage caused by the surveillance revelations to German-American relations. He maintained that the surveillance was necessary for international security but promised to work towards restoring trust. German reactions to Obama's speeches ranged from skepticism to hostility, with political leaders demanding a no-spy treaty and asserting that American surveillance constituted a crime.

The Obama administration's proposed overhaul of NSA phone surveillance programs in March 2014 included a promise to end the bulk collection of phone-call data. However, this promise remained unfulfilled as of March 2015, with the NSA retaining the authority to collect and store telephone record metadata.

The release of a declassified FISA report in May 2017 further underscored concerns about privacy violations. The report revealed that the NSA routinely violated the Fourth Amendment rights of Americans and abused intelligence tools. It criticized the Obama administration for an "institutional lack of candor" and the NSA for its "disregard" for rules. The report also highlighted issues with data sharing by the FBI, indicating hundreds of instances of illegal dissemination of raw surveillance data.

In conclusion, Obama's reversal on privacy protection, marked by his initial opposition to the Patriot Act as a senator and his subsequent renewal of certain provisions as president, sparked criticism and concerns about the protection of civil liberties. The Snowden revelations and subsequent responses by the Obama administration, as well as ongoing issues with NSA and FBI practices, further exacerbated the situation. The controversy surrounding Obama's stance on privacy protection had both domestic and international ramifications, highlighting the complexities and challenges of balancing national security and individual privacy rights.

Obama's administration was slow to notify fellow intelligence agencies of wrongly disseminated information about Americans

The Obama administration was slow to notify fellow intelligence agencies when it wrongly disseminated information about Americans. The law requires a notification within five days, but some took as long as 131 business days and the average was 19 days.

The National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) violated specific civil liberty protections during the Obama administration by improperly searching and disseminating raw intelligence on Americans or failing to promptly delete unauthorized intercepts. The NSA also admitted it was slow in some cases to notify fellow intelligence agencies when it wrongly disseminated information about Americans.

The NSA has, on occasion, exempted itself from its legal obligation to destroy all domestic communications that were improperly intercepted. Under the law, the NSA is supposed to destroy any intercept if it determines the data was domestically gathered, meaning someone was intercepted on U.S. soil without a warrant when the agency thought they were still overseas. However, the NSA has said previously it created "destruction waivers" to keep such intercepts in certain cases.

Obama's administration failed to destroy all domestic communications that were improperly intercepted

The Obama administration was accused of improperly intercepting communications of American citizens, including those of aides to then-president-elect Donald Trump. This was done by obtaining Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants to spy on American citizens, including Trump's National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

The National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) were found to have violated civil liberty protections during Obama's presidency by improperly searching and disseminating raw intelligence on Americans, as well as failing to promptly delete unauthorized intercepts.

In 2012, the NSA uncovered a significant violation in which "destruction waivers" were improperly used, and the infraction was slowly reported to the court. The NSA has, on occasion, exempted itself from its legal obligation to destroy all domestic communications that were improperly intercepted by creating "destruction waivers" to keep such intercepts.

The Obama administration expanded access to NSA information in February 2016 and January 2017, allowing a larger number of government officials to access unmasked names of Americans in intelligence reporting. This change appeared to weaken the unmasking rules and raised concerns about the potential for spying on members of Congress and political opponents.

The Inspector General's report confirmed that the Obama-era FBI abused the FISA process to target and spy on Trump's 2016 election campaign. It was found that FBI officials misled the FISA court, omitted critical exculpatory facts, and suppressed or ignored information that negated the reliability of their principal source.

Obama's administration exempted itself from its legal obligation to destroy all domestic communications that were improperly intercepted

Declassified memos released by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) revealed that the Obama administration violated American civil liberties by spying on US citizens. The National Security Agency (NSA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) were found to have improperly searched and disseminated raw intelligence on Americans, as well as failing to promptly delete unauthorized intercepts.

Under the law, the NSA is required to destroy any intercept if it is determined that the data was gathered domestically without a warrant. However, the Obama administration created "destruction waivers" to exempt itself from this legal obligation and retain improperly intercepted domestic communications. This was confirmed by newly released documents, which also revealed that the NSA uncovered a significant violation in 2012 where these waivers were improperly used, and the infraction was slowly reported to the court.

The NSA's ability to comply with its own rules has been called into question by these revelations, with critics arguing that the intelligence community's claim of robust protections for Americans incidentally intercepted is undermined by the memos. This incident has sparked concerns about the privacy and civil liberties of American citizens, with some calling for greater oversight and accountability to prevent future threats to the rule of law.

The Obama administration's actions in this case have been described as a "poor reflection" on the standards expected from a well-established law enforcement organization. The creation of "destruction waivers" and failure to promptly delete unauthorized intercepts raise serious questions about the administration's commitment to protecting the privacy and civil liberties of American citizens.

Frequently asked questions