Summer Sale Extended! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
News Opinion Editorial

Who will watch the watchers? [Editorial]

Having conducted a months-long review of the issue, President Obama reportedly will soon announce a proposal to end the National Security Agency's bulk collection of data about Americans' phone calls and require the agency to get a court order before seeking such information in the future.

But putting limits on the agency's capacity to spy on Americans may not be as easy as it sounds, especially if the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court which is supposed to rule on the legality of NSA programs, continues to rubber-stamp its approval of every request the agency apparently makes. Since the cases the court hears, its deliberations and the decisions it makes are all secret, there's no way for the public to know whether it's really keeping the NSA operating within the law or just making its snooping a little less illegal.

In January, Mr. Obama said he wanted to allow the agency to retain its ability to monitor the communications of suspected terrorists while ending the bulk collection of data on virtually every American's private phone calls. The NSA's secret bulk data collection program, which was uncovered by CIA leaker Edward Snowden last year, involves millions of records of so-called "metadata" — information about who is calling whom, from where and for how long — but not the actual content of the messages themselves.

However, since the metadata can be used to track not only a person's calling habits, but also his or her affiliations, purchases, movements and location, among other things, the program has rightly been criticized by civil liberties groups as a possible violation of citizens' Fourth Amendment right to privacy. The agency says it doesn't listen to the communications it monitors, but even without that information it can create a remarkably accurate profile of an individual's interests, activities, finances and network of personal, family and business contacts.

It's unclear how far the president's proposal would go toward addressing those concerns. Under Mr. Obama's plan, the NSA would stop collecting and storing such "metadata" itself and instead leave that function up to the telephone companies, which wouldn't be required to keep the information longer than the 18 months currently required under federal law. If the agency wanted to examine specific records related to a caller that has come under suspicion, it would have to get a judge on the FISA court to issue a new type of order requiring the companies to expedite the agency's access to that data and allowing it to seek records of callers up to two steps removed from the number for which the original request was made.

The NSA insists that it needs access to massive amounts of electronic data in order to analyze calling patterns that might be linked to suspected terrorists both in the U.S. and overseas. But limiting the agency's authority to directly monitor and store such data might not make much difference if it can secretly hack into the records held by telephone companies without their knowledge or if the new orders issued by the FISA court are so expansive that the NSA ends up with the same or greater access to call data that it now enjoys. The problem with holding an agency that operates in secret accountable always comes down to a question of who will watch the watchers.

If the FISA court is the only institution with the authority to keep the NSA operating within the law Americans may indeed have reason to feel uneasy. Given the unhappy experience of other regulatory bodies, it's all too easy to image the court becoming a captive of the agency it's supposed to be overseeing, if it hasn't already. Congress is ultimately responsible for making sure the NSA remains accountable to the nation's civilian leadership, but until Mr. Snowden's revelations it seemed perfectly content to let the agency do whatever it wanted as long as it was in the name of national security.

Several lawmakers, including Maryland Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, have recently offered plans similar to the president's for reining in the NSA. Those measures, along with Mr. Obama's proposals, are probably a step in the right direction toward making the agency more transparent. Unfortunately it may take years — and possibly another leak on the order of Mr. Snowden's revelations — before we know how effective they really are.

To respond to this editorial, send an email to Please include your name and contact information.

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • A temporary halt to the NSA's domestic spying program

    A temporary halt to the NSA's domestic spying program

    The government's authority to spy on the private phone calls of millions of Americans without their knowledge or consent expired at midnight Sunday, and for first time since the 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, citizens won't have the specter of "Big Brother" looking over their...

  • Taming 'Big Brother'

    Taming 'Big Brother'

    A week after a federal appeals court ruled that the National Security Agency's bulk data collection program was unconstitutional, the Obama administration is urging Congress to approve legislation that would put new limitations on the agency's power to track the private phone calls and emails of...

  • Reining in the surveillance state

    Reining in the surveillance state

    In a sign that the possibility of bipartisan cooperation in Congress is not completely dead, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have moved closer to a consensus on modifying the U.S. Patriot Act, which authorizes the government's secret spying program targeting the private phone calls and email...

  • Spying forever

    Spying forever

    Ever since former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden's revelations last year that the NSA was collecting information on the phone calls and emails of millions of U.S. citizens without their knowledge or consent, lawmakers have been assuring the public they will act to amend the...

  • Intelligence reform bill is important to safeguarding our security and privacy

    Intelligence reform bill is important to safeguarding our security and privacy

    A recent Baltimore Sun editorial described legislation to reform the government's collection of Americans' phone and email data as a sign that "bipartisan cooperation in Congress is not completely dead" ("Reining in the surveillance state," May 5). We'd like to remind The Sun that similar legislation...

  • Congress is not transparent enough about its intelligence oversight [Commentary]

    Congress is not transparent enough about its intelligence oversight [Commentary]

    Members criticize the hardworking employees of the National Security Agency, yet they aren't transparent about their oversight role

  • Unaccountable intelligence agencies [Letter]

    Unaccountable intelligence agencies [Letter]

    Attorney and former CIA officer Matthew Ferraro contends that U.S. intelligence agencies operate within "strict legal controls under the review of lawyers embedded at all levels, inspectors general, courts and Congress" ("The Snowden stigma," June 9).

  • Intelligence community has only itself to blame [Letter]

    Intelligence community has only itself to blame [Letter]

    Again, we have the "blame the media" scenario ("The Snowden stigma," June 9). A former intelligence officer tries awfully hard to make this point: "Edward Snowden's leaks and their media coverage have unfairly maligned the intelligence industry." But blaming the media for reporting the unprofessional,...