December 15, 2005 – Yesterday the House of Representatives voted to renew certain provisions of the Patriot Act that are set to expire at the end of this month. The bill now moves to the Senate, where debate is scheduled to begin on Thursday. But in an odd twist, a bipartisan group of six senators is threatening to filibuster the bill unless certain civil liberties guarantees are made. If the bill does make it to a vote, it has the votes to pass. But there is a 50-50 chance that the filibuster will hold which means the New Year could begin with significantly scaled back federal surveillance powers.

December 16, 2005 – In a stunning defeat for the White House, the Senate failed to end a filibuster that is preventing a vote to make sixteen provisions of the Patriot Act permanent law. The provisions, which give the government sweeping search and seizure powers, are due to expire at the end of this month. But a grass roots movement combined with news of abuses of power on the part of the administration, have given civil rights activists real hope that the provisions will never make it to a vote.

January 25, 2006 – Last month, just prior to the Congressional holiday recess, renewal efforts for the Patriot Act ground to a halt. The law, which gives the federal government sweeping search and seizure powers that many believe to be unconstitutional, had sixteen very controversial clauses that were due to expire at the beginning of this year. The Bush Administration had been pushing Congress to renew the law in its entirety, and to make it permanent. But when four Republican senators (a so-called “gang of four”) joined with democrats to demand greater protections for individual privacy, they were able to launch a filibuster to prevent a long term renewal of the law. Instead, the Senate and House of Representatives were forced into a compromise that renewed the law until February 3, 2006.

“Earlier this year in a speech at the Department of Justice, President Obama announced a transition that would end the Section 215 bulk telephony metadata program as it existed, and that the government would establish a mechanism that preserves the capabilities we need without the government holding this bulk data," said Attorney General Holder and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

Today, the Department of Justice and Office of the Director of National Intelligence released, in redacted form, a previously classified series of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court filings and orders from 2009-2010 concerning the collection of bulk telephony metadata under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act. These documents relate to a robust interaction that occurred between the Department of Justice and a telecommunications service provider that included the provider’s review of prior FISC applications, orders and opinions, regarding lawful compliance with those orders.

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?

Apr 21, 2020

The last time the United States faced a big, hard-to-track threat, we ended up with the Patriot Act and a mass-surveillance program that still rankles. This time, how do we use technology to combat the novel coronavirus without creating elements of a police state?