More than 50 lawmakers are urging congressional leaders to avoid linking a soon-to-expire surveillance program to a massive defense policy bill.
The letter — spearheaded by Reps. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) and Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) — comes as Congress has a matter of weeks before the end-of-the-year deadline to reauthorize Section 702. The authority is meant to target the communications of foreigners abroad but has run into controversy because of its ability to sweep in Americans.
“A temporary extension would be entirely unnecessary, and it would be an inexcusable violation of the public’s trust to quietly greenlight an authority that has been flagrantly abused,” Davidson, Lofgren and 52 other lawmakers wrote in the letter, first reported by POLITICO.
Leadership hasn’t publicly indicated they intend to link a short-term extension of the surveillance power to the National Defense Authorization Act. But lawmakers and aides involved in the surveillance debate say they are likely to need more time and pointed to attaching a temporary extension to the defense bill, which also has to pass by the end of the year, as one way to accomplish that.
However, the group warned leadership that attaching a short-term 702 extension to the NDAA would “undermine the credibility of any legislation employed for this reauthorization,” indicating it could threaten the defense bill’s ultimate passage. Members tasked with negotiating the defense measure are scheduled to meet Wednesday, with the bill expected to be finalized this week.
“If Section 702 is to be reauthorized for even a single day, it must be through standalone legislation subject to robust, open debate and amendment,” the bipartisan group wrote in their letter.
In addition to linking 702 to the NDAA, the group is also urging leadership to oppose attaching it to another “must-pass” bill.
And these members aren’t the only ones not sold on a short-term extension.
Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) declined this week to say if he would back a temporary extension, telling reporters: “It would be disappointing if this authority were to lapse.”
Privacy advocates on-and-off Capitol Hill also grew concerned over the weekend that Speaker Mike Johnson could try to link a forthcoming reauthorization from the House Intelligence Committee, which will include narrower changes than they are hoping for, to the defense bill.
“It would be unwise and dangerous for Members of Congress to greenlight another major surveillance reauthorization without carefully considering and enacting robust reforms. That includes through the NDAA process,” Lofgren said in a statement.
Davidson, in a statement, added that, “Congress must allow opportunity for open debate, amendments, and reform prior to any” surveillance reauthorization.
But Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) tweeted this week that Johnson told him he would bring up 702 reauthorization as a stand-alone bill. Neither spokespeople for Johnson nor Gaetz responded to a question Tuesday about if that meant he wouldn’t try to attach a short-term extension to the defense bill.
The potential for a one-to-two-month stopgap comes as the House is entering the last month before the deadline without an agreed upon path forward.
Both the House Intelligence and Judiciary committees are moving forward with their own bills. While the two panels have agreed on several areas — including penalties, changes to the surveillance court and reporting requirements — they are divided on when a warrant should be required for searching 702-collected data for Americans.
Jordan told POLITICO that he will have a committee vote on his forthcoming bill next Wednesday, Dec. 6. The Intelligence Committee is also expected to soon release its bill.
Anthony Adragna contributed to this report.
