In the wake of increasing concerns about governmental surveillance, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), alongside 23 other prominent organizations—including the ACLU, Restore the Fourth, and the Brennan Center for Justice—has urged the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) to provide accurate figures regarding the number of U.S. persons whose communications have been collected by the government. This movement stems from longstanding promises made by National Security Agency (NSA) officials to deliver an estimate of communications “incidentally” collected via Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, which targets foreign individuals abroad but inadvertently captures data from Americans through their communications with foreigners. The lack of transparency surrounding these operations raises significant issues regarding the trustworthiness of these agencies and their accountability to the public.
Section 702 grants the government the authority to surveil foreign targets from within the U.S., relying heavily on telecommunications service providers to hand over data. Although the law expressly prohibits the NSA from deliberately targeting Americans, the reality is that a sizable volume of communications from innocent U.S. individuals is routinely collected incidentally. Since interactions with people outside the U.S. are commonplace, this results in an extensive data trove that includes a wealth of U.S.-based communications. Subsequently, domestic law enforcement agencies, like the FBI, can exploit this data through backdoor warrantless searches, which poses serious implications for individual privacy rights.
For more than a decade, the EFF has actively campaigned each time Section 702 approaches expiration, striving to instill necessary reforms aimed at restoring privacy rights. However, following the most recent reauthorization by Congress in the spring of 2024, the lack of amendments and protections for citizens remains disheartening. Once again, Section 702 has been renewed for two additional years without crucial changes that would safeguard individual privacy against mass surveillance practices. The ongoing battle for reform underscores a critical tension between national security interests and the privacy rights of citizens.
As the EFF prepares for future engagements against the reauthorization of Section 702, joining forces with various allied organizations to demand transparency reflects an effort to understand the grave implications of the problem at hand. By calling for the disclosure of how many U.S. citizens have been affected by indiscriminate surveillance, the hope is to shed light on the extent of the issue and question the legitimacy of existing surveillance practices. This collective advocacy aims to push the conversation about surveillance and privacy into the public sphere, thereby fostering greater awareness and discourse around these pressing issues.
Matthew Guariglia, a senior policy analyst at EFF, specializes in surveillance and policing issues across various levels of government. His academic background, rooted in history with a focus on race, immigration, and policing in New York City, informs his insights into how surveillance practices intersect with broader societal issues. Guariglia’s recent scholarly works further discuss the relationships between policing and systemic issues, conveying the necessity of addressing these intersectional narratives. His presence in the dialogue surrounding surveillance underscores the importance of academic perspectives in shaping public policy.
The call for transparency, spearheaded by the EFF and its allies, ultimately reflects a larger societal demand for accountability and ethical governance within intelligence practices. By shedding light on how Section 702 operates and the impacts it has on American citizens, there is a clear push towards restoring public trust in government institutions. The aspirational goal is not merely for legislative changes but for a cultural shift that recognizes and actively protects the privacy rights of individuals against unwarranted government intrusion. As the debate continues, the involvement of activists and scholars alike could play a pivotal role in shaping a future where privacy is respected and upheld as a fundamental right.
