The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution says:
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
Pretty clear language, no?
Apparently not for National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan:
NSA Jake Sullivan on amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to require a "warrant for every query of lawfully collected data":
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) February 14, 2024
"We do not believe that that serves the national security interests of the United States" pic.twitter.com/thiMgHotHm
First, some background:
Update: Our government invades Americans’ privacy without a warrant, using the FISA 702 program.
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) February 14, 2024
That’s unconstitutional.
Thursday, we will have a recorded vote on an amendment to reform this program so the feds will have to get a warrant to search US citizens’ communications. pic.twitter.com/9i2YC01ZoP
Later this afternoon there will be a vote to require warrants to search our communications.
It'll be very interesting to see how this vote goes.
Especially since NSA Sullivan says it's not in our 'national security interests.'
Twitter/X users, on the other hand, are very supportive of such an admendment:
Former UN Ambassador Samantha Power signed over 200 FISA requests and couldn't remember any of them.
— Andrea E (@AAC0519) February 14, 2024
That's how Democrats use this system. Bury the request like expenses buried in obscure accounts.
Bury it in bureaucracy.
It's the American way.
One of these days... these guys might try reading the US Constitution.
— Charles R. Smith🔹 (@softwarnet) February 14, 2024
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated
It's right there in black and white.
It's getting hotter in this pot of water for us frogs.
— Jules! (@sparkly_jules1) February 14, 2024
Yes it is.
"Lawfully collected" is carrying a lot of water here.
— often uncommon 👊 (consumptionist) (@oftenuncommon) February 14, 2024
Our government should be erring on the side of collecting less data unless there is a specific warrant for the collection.
Given the breadth of federal law, this gives them carte blanche to get you for breaking a law you didn't even know existed. Data collection should require a warrant and be minimized.
No but it serves the letter and the intent of the U.S. Constitution, you fascist.
— President Doctor (@LDreeniatnuom) February 14, 2024
They hate the Constitution, and the rights it protects.
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan officially joins The Intel Bros™️—“trust me, requiring a warrant for FISA 702 backdoor searches won’t serve U.S. national security interests.”
— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) February 15, 2024
Those who proposed and ratified the Fourth Amendment would disagree.
So do most Americans. https://t.co/tkM6CixC0F
Yes, they do.
Imagine saying that the Fourth Amendment‘s warrant requirement should be ignored because it doesn’t “serve the national security interests of the United States.” This is like Mike Rogers-level idiocy. https://t.co/yKb1XqGANg
— Justin Amash (@justinamash) February 14, 2024
No Amendment should be ignored.
A reminder: this is why the Fourth Amendment exists. https://t.co/wZgggqUHAo
— alexandriabrown (@alexthechick) February 14, 2024
It is why the Fourth Amendment exists. To protect us from government overreach like this.
The White House arguing, from the podium, that it no longer believes the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution "serves the interests of the United States."
— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) February 14, 2024
Super. https://t.co/GMMWjf70gH
We're sure nothing bad could come of this.
It’s never good when there are repeated vague murmurings about “national security interests” from the government, without an iota of detail or explanation about why. https://t.co/Vnuo8sv7nB
— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) February 15, 2024
'Because we said so' seems to be their argument here.
It’s time to end the unconstitutional spying on Americans and restore our 4th Amendment rights! No more sacrificing our freedoms in the name of national security. https://t.co/n667VZEAOF
— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) February 14, 2024
This is long overdue.
And then use it to orchestrate one of the greatest political hoaxes in American history. https://t.co/u1q1ApAAAQ
— Federalist Musket🇺🇸 (@Patriot_Musket) February 14, 2024
Exactly.
But hey, who cares about civil liberties or privacy rights when the government is "protecting" us, right? I mean, it's not like the NSA has ever abused its power or overstepped its boundaries before. Oh, wait... https://t.co/xHt76kdpTC
— Joe (@JoeMaristela) February 15, 2024
We can totally trust the government.
We'll update you once the vote takes place.
***
Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy's conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 50% off your VIP membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member