According to court records from 2009, after repeated assurances
the NSA would obey the court's rules, it acknowledged that it had
collected material improperly. In one instance, the government said
its violations were caused by "poor management, lack of involvement
by compliance officials and lack of internal verification
procedures, not by bad faith." In another case, the NSA said it
improperly collected information due to a typographical error.
The intelligence court judge, U.S. District Judge John D. Bates,
said in the 2009 case that since the government had repeatedly
offered so many assurances despite the problems continuing, "those
responsible for conducting oversight at the NSA had failed to do so
effectively." Bates called his conclusion "the most charitable
interpretation possible."
The Obama administration published the heavily censored files Monday
night as part of an ongoing civil liberties lawsuit challenging the
constitutionality of the government's collection of phone records,
which the White House has said is important to countering terrorism.
The files published Monday night were so heavily censored that one
of the two justifications for the government to search through
Americans' phone records was blacked out.
The latest release reflects the administration's strenuous efforts
to maintain its legal authority to collect Americans' phone records
amid opposition on Capitol Hill.
Meanwhile, in a legal victory for the administration, the Supreme
Court on Monday refused to intervene in the NSA controversy. It
rejected a call from a privacy group to stop the agency from
collecting the telephone records of millions of Verizon customers in
the United States. While the justices on Monday declined to get
involved in this issue, other lawsuits on the topic are making their
way through the lower courts around the country.
In the new disclosures, some files were declassified ostensibly to
show that even when NSA employees collected records improperly or
improperly shared material among themselves, those problems were
reported to the intelligence court and new procedures were put in
place to prevent them from happening again.
Similar documents about the U.S. collecting phone records were
previously declassified and published in response to a lawsuit filed
by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the Obama administration
has revealed others to convince Congress to allow it to continue
collecting the phone records.
After the NSA began the bulk collection program in 2006, one NSA
inspector general's report said rules already in place were
"adequate" and "in several aspects exceed the terms" of what the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court had required. But it
recommended three additional practices be formally adopted. These
included such obvious ideas as not allowing analysts who searched
phone records in the terror database also to approve which numbers
can be searched, and periodically checking the phone numbers that
analysts searched to make sure they had actually been approved.
[to top of second column] |
Despite the assurances in 2006 that rules were adequate, problems
surfaced in 2009 that were so serious that the intelligence court
temporarily shut down the surveillance program.
One of the newly disclosed files was a slap — intentionally or
otherwise — at Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the chairman of the Senate
Judiciary Committee who is leading the fight on Capitol Hill to rein
in the government's phone records collection. In a ruling to justify
the program by the then-chief judge of the intelligence court,
Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, she quoted a 2001 floor speech by Leahy to
explain that Congress believed that phone records could be collected
under U.S. laws.
Leahy has proposed ending the NSA's sweep of phone records, allowing
the government to seek only records related to ongoing terror
investigations.
The documents included training materials for NSA analysts, who were
warned that they should only search the database of all phone
records for numbers they suspected were associated with terrorists:
"Analysts are NOT free to use a telephone selector based on a hunch
or guess," according to a 2007 training presentation. It added that
the NSA's legal standard for picking a phone number for a terror
suspect required "some minimal level of objective justification."
The training slides noted that the government shouldn't snoop on the
phone records of Americans whose only suspicious behaviors were
protected by the First Amendment, such as speaking or writing in
opposition to the U.S. government, worshipping at a mosque or
working as a journalist.
"A telephone selector believed to be used by a U.S. person shall not
be regarded as associated with (censored) solely on the basis of
activities protected by the First Amendment," it said.
The administration has been under pressure to reveal more details
about the government's domestic surveillance program since a former
intelligence contractor, Edward Snowden, released documents showing
massive trawling of domestic data by the National Security Agency.
[Associated
Press; EILEEN SULLIVAN]
Associated Press writers
Jack Gillum, Stephen Braun, Matt Apuzzo, Lolita C. Baldor, Charles
Babington, Marcy Gordon and Richard Lardner contributed to this
report.
Copyright 2013 The Associated
Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |