On the recordApril 18, 2024
Well, I hope I understand the Senator's position as well because I think we just reached a point of agreement. The question is, where do we go from here? If the foreigner names an American citizen, that is incidental. If our Agency of government decides that they want to explore conversations--phone conversations, texts, and emails--of that named American citizen, I think we both agree, at that point, we have reached Fourth Amendment protection, and it requires a warrant. All I have tried to do with my amendment is to condition that situation that I have just described to you to be protected in law with three exceptions. I create three exceptions: an emergency situation. I mean, you can imagine--and I can too--after living through 9/11 and other instances. Sometimes you have to move and move quickly, and even a Fourth Amendment warrant may be questionable. The second part is cybersecurity--or that may be part of it. And the third is when that American citizen happens to be asking to be protected for fear that something is happening to them that they don't want to happen; so they ask the Agency of the government to go forward and inquire as to that foreigner because they want, for their own protection, the Agency to do it. Those three things are built into my amendment as well. So we may be perilously close to an agreement. I don't know. I won't presume that, but I think what we have said so far is something that I can live with.





