On the recordFebruary 12, 2008
I would note that the Intelligence Committee debated this and accepted a return to the original FISA exclusive means provision, which I think we should maintain, and I urge opposition. S. 2248 already has an exclusive means provision that is identical to the first part of this amendment. That provision simply restates Congress's intent back in 1978 when FISA was enacted to place the President at his lowest ebb of authority in conducting warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance. The current exclusive mean provision in S. 2248 was acceptable to all sides because it maintains the status quo with respect to the dispute over the President's constitutional authority to authorize warrantless surveillance. Unfortunately, this amendment is a significant expansion of the bipartisan provision in the Intelligence Committee's bill. It goes further by stating that only an express statutory authorization for electronic surveillance, other than FISA or the criminal wiretap statutes, shall constitute additional exclusive means. This attempts to prohibit the President's exercise of his judicially recognized article II authority to issue warrantless electronic surveillance directives. It also would require that future authorizations for the use of military force, AUMFs, expressly state that they authorize the use of additional electronic surveillance.
Source
govinfo.gov




