-9999

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I call up S. 4444, a bill to extend the surveillance law known as section 702, for 3 weeks and to require the declassification of the FISA Court's recent ruling on section 702. That ruling found serious violations of Americans' constitutional rights in how the Trump administration has used section 702. The Congress should not vote--should not vote--to renew section 702 while Americans are left in the dark about these troubling abuses.

Today is the expiration date for section 702. Nonetheless, because of a court order, the government's surveillance can continue without interruption until March of 2027. Several Senators have made it clear to me that they are uncomfortable with section 702 expiring. I believe it will be easier to negotiate reforms to section 702 if the Congress passes a short-term extension. The bill that I seek to pass is straightforward: a 3-week extension.

Every day that section 702 is extended without meaningful reforms is a day that the program can continue to be abused. I am willing to allow a short-term extension so long as important information currently hidden from the public is declassified so that Congress can have a full public debate. A 3-week extension is more than reasonable. Senators from both parties introduced legislation months ago, and we have been prepared to negotiate.

Unfortunately, Senators willing to accept business as usual decided to wait. They wanted to just wait around until just before expiration to try to jam through whatever they wanted. That approach failed 2 weeks ago. Senators for business as usual decided they weren't going to use that extra time to do any negotiating.

If the House and Senate are given the opportunity to vote on a long- term extension with meaningful reforms to protect the privacy rights of Americans, it is going to pass. Three weeks is more than enough time to negotiate a reform bill; that is, if Members are serious about negotiating.

My legislation requires the government to declassify the FISA Court's March 17 ruling on section 702. The government is already required by law to declassify this court ruling. This is an important part of the debate. Let me repeat that. Declassification is already required by law. All that my bill requires is that the opinion be declassified now--now--before Congress votes on renewing section 702.

The law requiring declassification and public release of the court's rulings isn't even remotely controversial. Each year, the FISA Court issues a ruling approving the program, and every year the government follows the law and comes around to declassifying the ruling. These declassified rulings inform Congress and the public about how the administration and the FISA Court interpret the law. It sheds light on past abuses. These opinions are critical to congressional oversight and to the public.

So what might be different this year? First, the March 17 ruling describes serious abuses of section 702 and violations of Americans' constitutional rights. The Congress is debating section 702 reauthorization right now. So maybe there are some who would rather have Congress just go out and vote in the dark--vote in the dark before the public hears about the Trump administration's latest violation of Americans' constitutional rights.

So I am going to wrap up by addressing the arguments of some of our opponents. First, what about protecting what is called sources and methods? My bill allows the executive branch to make redactions to protect sources and methods, just as they have done for all previous section 702 FISA rulings that have been released to the public.

Second, you may hear there is not enough time to do this. The Trump administration has known for over a month that they are legally required to declassify the opinion that I am seeking. My bill would give them 2 more weeks to do it. That is more than enough time to carefully redact a single document. Believe me, when the government wants to declassify something, they sure as hell move fast.

To sum up, my bill gives Congress more than enough time to negotiate a section 702 reauthorization bill with meaningful reforms, and it requires the declassification of information that, in my view, is critical to the debate and the public's understanding of what is being voted on.

4444, which is at the desk; that the bill be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, so let me repeat the central business in a key area, and that is: I am prepared today to pass a short-term extension of section 702. I am doing that because I have listened to colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

I don't think it is really necessary because of the FISA Court ruling recently, but in the interest of comity and working together--which is something I have tried to make a priority--I want to state again: I am prepared to pass a short-term extension of section 702 today.

What I am also extraordinarily concerned about, though, is there is a classified ruling of the FISA Court that found troubling abuses of section 702 that violate Americans' constitutional rights.

Let me just repeat that. That is a finding that the court found of troubling abuses of Americans' constitutional rights.

What I am beginning to get a sense of is the Trump administration is now so desperate to keep this ruling secret they would rather let section 702 expire than make it public, which I believe is the key here--make it public before the vote.

The American people deserve to know what the Trump administration is up to. Before the Congress votes on whether to give Americans greater protections, Congress must use a short-term extension to openly debate the critical issues in front of the American people, and I am disappointed that instead, it sure feels right now that the other side of the aisle is covering the abuses up.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, my colleague on the other side of the aisle is now ducking the issue that I have brought to light. I am clear that I am for a short-term extension. I have said it now three or four times.

But I also believe that the government, which is already required to declassify the ruling I am seeking, it ought to get out to the American people. That is what this is all about. I would just say to my colleague the chairman: Let's let the American people decide whether it is not a big deal as my colleague has said.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source