[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 69 (Friday, April 19, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2921-S2928]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]





            REFORMING INTELLIGENCE AND SECURING AMERICA ACT

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. King). The clerk will report the bill by 
title.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 7888) to reform the Foreign Intelligence 
     Surveillance Act of 1978.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.


                           Order of Business

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the only 
amendments in order to H.R. 7888 be the following: Paul No. 1829; 
Marshall No. 1834; Wyden No. 1820; Paul No. 1828; Durbin No. 1841, as 
modified; Lee No. 1840; further, that upon disposition of the 
amendments, the bill, as amended, if amended, be considered read a 
third time and the Senate vote on passage, with 60 affirmative votes 
required for adoption of the Paul amendments and on passage, as 
amended, if amended, with 2 minutes for debate, equally divided, prior 
to each vote, with Senator Paul permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes 
prior to the vote on amendment No. 1829, all without further 
intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Hearing none, without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, we have good news for America's national 
security. Senators have reached an agreement that clears the way to 
approve the FISA reauthorization tonight.
  For the information of my colleagues, we will have up to seven 
rollcall votes. First, we will vote on the six amendments and then 
final passage.
  All day long, we persisted and persisted and persisted in the hopes 
of reaching a breakthrough, and I am glad we got it done. There was a 
great deal of doubt that we could get this done, but now we are on a 
glidepath to passing this bill.
  Allowing FISA to expire would have been dangerous. It is an important 
part of our national security toolkit, and it helps law enforcement 
stop terrorist attacks, drug trafficking, and violent extremism. This 
legislation has been carefully tailored, and I am ready to work with 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to keep strengthening protections 
for American citizens.
  I thank all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their 
good work.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.


                           Amendment No. 1829

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, the title of this amendment is the ``Fourth 
Amendment Is Not For Sale.''
  The Fourth Amendment is no mere limitation of government power. The 
Fourth Amendment is fundamental to the concept of American liberty. The 
Fourth Amendment was a response to the British writs of assistance, 
which served as general warrants and permitted almost limitless 
searches of homes and ships of colonies. In 1761, an attorney named 
James Otis forcefully attacked the writs of assistance, and John Adams 
described that he was so inspired by Otis and the arguments that, then 
and there, the ``child of Independence'' was born.
  The Fourth Amendment prohibits these kinds of general warrants. For a 
search to be reasonable, the Fourth Amendment dictates that the 
government must identify the individual, the items, and the location to 
be searched, but, today, all it takes to eviscerate the Fourth 
Amendment is some cash. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act 
already requires the government to seek a court order before compelling 
service providers to disclose contents and records, but this law does 
not restrict providers from voluntarily selling that information to 
nongovernmental third parties.
  Due to this loophole in the law, American Government has effectively 
resurrected the idea of general warrants that the Founding Fathers were 
so appalled by. Thankfully, the House of Representatives voted to close 
that loophole. The House voted overwhelmingly this week for the Fourth 
Amendment Is Not For Sale Act.
  I am so glad that the Fourth Amendment Is Not for Sale Act is 
popular; that Senator Schumer has been a cosponsor of this. I hope he 
will vote with us tonight.
  But if he chooses not to vote with us tonight, the bill has passed 
the House. All he would need to do is bring it up in the next few 
weeks, and we could actually put it on the books.
  Leaders of both parties from across the political spectrum have come 
together to say you shouldn't be able to buy your way around the Fourth 
Amendment. The Senate must not prove itself to be less concerned about 
the Fourth Amendment. I hope that we will take this up.
  The data you transmit can reveal much about your life, such as where 
you work, where you drop off your child for daycare, whether you visit 
a gun range, who you associate with, your health data. Some of these 
applications sell that data to third-party brokers who then sell it to 
the government.
  It may be concerning that some of your information is traded away, 
but we should insist that the Fourth Amendment should be respected so 
that individuals are not tracked and investigated without a warrant.
  When law enforcement suspects you of a crime, the supreme law of the 
land is clear: Officers must demonstrate to a neutral judge in an open 
court that probable cause of a crime exists. In fact, if you want to 
find the people in our country who respect the Fourth Amendment, meet 
with any local police officer, any local sheriff. They know they don't 
come into your house. What has happened is the politicized aspects of 
our intel Agencies don't have the same respect for the Fourth Amendment 
that local law enforcement does.
  According to Professor Matthew Tokson, a professor at the University 
of Utah, after the Supreme Court prohibited warrantless collection of 
cell phone location data in Carpenter v. United States, the government 
Agencies just began buying that information anyway. They were told not 
to by the Supreme Court. So they just went and purchased it and 
eviscerated a Supreme Court decision. This is something we should not 
tolerate.
  A recent report by the inspector general of the Department of 
Homeland Security demonstrated that several DHS Agencies, including the 
Secret Service, bought Americans' phone location data without a court 
order. The IRS purchases location data without a court order. The FBI 
purchases your location data without an order--to just name a few. The 
NSA, the Defense Intelligence Agency--all have bought Americans' 
location data without a court order.
  The embrace of this tactic proves that the feds will zealously 
exploit any loophole and test the limits of their authorities, to the 
detriment of our constitutionally protected liberties.
  It is time to end the use of cash to purchase general warrants that 
the Fourth Amendment should have abolished over two centuries ago. 
Let's ensure that the Fourth Amendment is truly not for sale.
  I ask for a ``yes'' vote.
  Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1829 and ask that it be 
reported by number.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Paul] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 1829.

  (The amendment is printed in the Record of April 18, 2024, under 
``Text of Amendments.'')
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will now be 2 minutes to debate equally 
divided on the Paul amendment No. 1829.
  Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the amendment. 
Before I get to the substance, let me remind my colleague, I think, of 
something we have discussed a lot.
  Any amendment added to this bill at the moment is the equivalent of 
killing the bill. Many have said: If we go past midnight tonight, it 
doesn't really matter.
  Already, telecom companies--a number--have contacted the Department 
of Justice saying: If this bill expires--as it will at midnight--they 
will stop complying with 702, one of the most critical components of 
our intelligence backbone.
  The specifics of this amendment are opposed by every law enforcement 
agency in America. It also is opposed by a number of Jewish community 
groups, including B'nai B'rith and the Anti-defamation League.

[[Page S2922]]

  I would agree with the Senator from Kentucky: We ought to have a 
debate about data brokers. But 702 is not the place to have it. As a 
matter of fact, the House decided not to include this in their 
discussion of 702.
  If we pass this amendment, the only people who are going to be taken 
out from purchasing data will be law enforcement--not foreign 
companies, not foreign governments, or others.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. PAUL. The idea that we don't have time is a specious one. The 
only reason we wouldn't have time is because the supporters of this 
bill delayed to the last hour. We have 5 years to renew this. We 
delayed it until we have 4 hours left, and then we are told we can't 
amend it because we don't have enough time. That is a false argument.
  The House is still here. They are going to be voting tomorrow. We 
should pass the good amendments today, send them to the House tomorrow. 
This is an argument that has been forced upon us by the supporters of 
FISA who want no debate, and they want no restrictions. They want no 
warrants, and they want nothing to protect the Americans. They want to 
allow whatever goes, whatever happens to happen, and to hell with the 
American individual citizen and the Bill of Rights.
  I say: Don't listen to the people who don't want amendments and don't 
want debate, and let's pass this amendment.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 1829

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  Mr. PAUL. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays have been requested.
  Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Cortez 
Masto), the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin), and the Senator 
from Georgia (Mr. Warnock) are necessarily absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. 
Capito), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from 
Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).
  The result was announced--yeas 31, nays 61, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 144 Leg.]

                                YEAS--31

     Baldwin
     Braun
     Cantwell
     Coons
     Cramer
     Cruz
     Daines
     Durbin
     Hawley
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lee
     Lummis
     Markey
     Marshall
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Paul
     Sanders
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Tuberville
     Van Hollen
     Warren
     Welch
     Wyden

                                NAYS--61

     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Boozman
     Britt
     Brown
     Budd
     Butler
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Duckworth
     Ernst
     Fetterman
     Fischer
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hyde-Smith
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Lujan
     McConnell
     Moran
     Mullin
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Reed
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Thune
     Tillis
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Blackburn
     Capito
     Cortez Masto
     Hagerty
     Manchin
     Schmitt
     Vance
     Warnock
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 31, the nays are 
61.
  Under the previous order requiring 60 votes for the adoption of this 
amendment, the amendment is not agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 1829) was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.


                      Senator Collins 9,000th Vote

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, now, before we move on, I would like to 
acknowledge a rare milestone that is just about to be achieved on this 
coming vote in the Senate. Our dear colleague from Maine, Senator Susan 
Collins, will cast her nine-thousandth consecutive rollcall vote.
  (Applause, Senators rising.)
  She has never--never--missed a single rollcall vote in her entire 
career. Who else can claim that? Raise your hand. Even the freshmen 
can't claim that.
  I congratulate Senator Collins on this historic accomplishment. It 
puts her in rare company in the history of the Chamber.
  Senator Collins and I, of course, belong to different parties, but 
she has the enormous respect of those of us on this side of the aisle 
as well as her own colleagues. And I have been grateful for the chance 
to work with her in recent years on many issues. So we all have 
applauded her great work.
  I yield the floor to my colleague and friend, Senator McConnell.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I would like to thank the majority 
leader for his acknowledgement of this historic moment.
  The senior Senator from Maine, our good friend, is about to cast, as 
we all know, her nine-thousandth consecutive rollcall vote.
  Quite literally, as the occupant of the Chair knows, Senator Collins 
has never failed to discharge the most fundamental duty of her office.
  According to the Historical Office, only one Senator in history has 
managed a longer streak of consecutive votes--and let's just say, 
Senator Collins is closing in on that record as well.
  I hope our colleague is as proud of this accomplishment as we are of 
her. One thing is for certain: She didn't reach the milestone by 
accident. Senator Collins arrived as a freshman already well aware of 
the obligations of public service. After all, she was raised by not one 
but two smalltown mayors.
  And as our colleagues know, one of those distinguished mayors--her 
mother, Patricia--passed away earlier this year, right as the 
government funding she had stewarded was nearing the finish line.
  It was a situation that made the tension we have all felt at times 
between the demands of the Senate and of family. But as always, the 
example of the senior Senator from Maine was instructive: poised under 
pressure, prepared for any outcome, and as determined as ever to do 
right by the people she represents.
  Day after day, year after year, our senior-most appropriator has 
demonstrated through her dedication that if you do your homework and 
show up to vote, most everything else will fall in line.
  So I would like to add my congratulations to my good friend Senator 
Collins on this tremendous milestone. The people of Maine are lucky to 
have her.
  (Applause, Senators rising.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican whip.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, if I might, again, 9,000 is remarkable--the 
``iron'' Senator. And she was asked by the Washington Post 12 years ago 
why she had never missed a vote, why she made a decision to make every 
vote. And this is what she said:

       I think it's important at this time, when public confidence 
     in Congress is very low, to demonstrate to my constituents 
     that I really care about doing a good job for them.

  For 27 straight years and 9,000 straight votes, she has delivered 
every single day for the people of Maine, for the people of this 
country. And I am grateful to have the privilege and opportunity to 
serve with her, as I think every single one of us is--not only those 
who are here today but those who have come before. It is a remarkable 
achievement.
  Senator Collins, thank you. Thank you for your record. Thank you for 
your example.
  (Applause.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. And the Chair conveys his heartfelt 
congratulations and pride to his colleague.
  Thank you, Susan, for all you have done.


                           Amendment No. 1834

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.
  Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1834 and ask 
that it be reported by number.

[[Page S2923]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Marshall] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 1834.

  The amendment is as follows:

   (Purpose: To strike the prohibition on political appointees being 
     involved in the approval of queries by the Federal Bureau of 
                             Investigation)

       On page 3, strike line 16 and all that follows through page 
     4, line 12, and insert the following:
       (b) Requirement for Senior Leadership To Approve Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation Queries.--Subparagraph (D) of section 
     702(f)(3), as added by subsection (d) of this section, is 
     amended by inserting after clause (v) the following:
       ``(vi) Requirement for senior leadership to approve federal 
     bureau of investigation queries.--The procedures shall 
     require that the Director of the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation or the Attorney General be included in the 
     Federal Bureau of Investigation's prior approval process 
     under clause (ii).''.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will now be 2 minutes of debate, equally 
divided, on the Marshall amendment No. 1834.
  The Senator from Kansas.
  Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. President, during the last administration, we saw 
career, unelected bureaucrats, many of whom were FBI agents, actively 
work against our Commander in Chief.
  Now, in this bill, we are giving unilateral control over section 702 
to those same career staff who have a record of abusing their power. As 
written, section 2(b) of the bill would prohibit political appointees 
from being within the process of approving section 702 queries. This 
means there is no accountability for these agents by the FBI Director 
or Attorney General.
  Regardless of who is President, they and their politically appointed 
FBI Director and Attorney General should have full control of the 
Agencies and Departments they are leading.
  We must make FBI and DOJ leadership accountable for eventual section 
702 abuses. We should require the Attorney General and FBI Director to 
sign off on 702 investigations.
  As this is such a momentous vote, it would be great that it also 
passed. So, with that, I urge your ``yes'' vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, actually, what the bill does is it 
requires, especially in cases of politically sensitive queries, that it 
be approved by a supervisor to take it out of the hands of the career 
individuals who in the past have or potentially have abused this 
authority.
  Now, there are two ways to skin this cat. The challenge of the 
political appointees is twofold. The first is it is a political 
appointee. There is a person who owes their job to the party in power 
in the White House.
  And so the thinking was that if you put someone like that in charge, 
it actually might lend itself to this being abused for political use.
  The second is, it is actually harder to hold political appointees 
accountable. As we saw this week, the only way to get rid of, for 
example, the Attorney General would be to impeach them.
  In this particular case, if it is a supervisor, that supervisor could 
be fired. Everyone in these Departments is ultimately accountable to 
the Attorney General and/or the FBI Director.
  And I would add one more point. Another reform that is in this bill 
that is important to point to is that the compensation of the FBI 
Director will now be directly tied to how the Department performs every 
single year on the audit of compliance with 702.
  So I urge this amendment be defeated.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 1834

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment.
  Mr. MARSHALL. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Cortez 
Masto), the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin), and the Senator 
from Georgia (Mr. Warnock) are necessarily absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. 
Capito), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from 
Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).
  The result was announced--yeas 17, nays 75, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 145 Leg.]

                                YEAS--17

     Braun
     Daines
     Grassley
     Hawley
     Hyde-Smith
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lee
     Lummis
     Marshall
     Mullin
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Sullivan
     Tuberville

                                NAYS--75

     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Boozman
     Britt
     Brown
     Budd
     Butler
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Ernst
     Fetterman
     Fischer
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Lujan
     Markey
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Moran
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Reed
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warren
     Welch
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Blackburn
     Capito
     Cortez Masto
     Hagerty
     Manchin
     Schmitt
     Vance
     Warnock
  The amendment (No. 1834) was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.


                           Amendment No. 1820

  Mr. WYDEN. I call up my amendment No. 1820 and ask that it be 
reported by number.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment by number.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Oregon [Mr. Wyden], for himself and Ms. 
     Lummis, proposes an amendment numbered 1820.

  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To strike section 25, relating to definition of electronic 
                    communication service provider)

       Beginning on page 87, strike line 14 and all that follows 
     through page 90, line 4.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will be 2 minutes of debate equally 
divided on the Wyden amendment No. 1820.
  The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, this bipartisan amendment strikes a 
dangerous provision that was slipped in at the last moment in the House 
of Representatives and has never been considered or examined here in 
the Senate. The provision dramatically expands warrantless surveillance 
by authorizing the government, for countless typical Americans and 
American companies, to secretly assist in their surveillance. If there 
is one thing we know, expansive surveillance authorities will always be 
used and abused.
  Let's do the right thing and vote aye to strike the horribly drafted, 
sweeping new surveillance authorities that we will surely regret.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I oppose this amendment. When 702 was 
drafted in 2008, the telecom world was very different than it is today. 
Things like cloud and data centers didn't exist.
  I disagree with my colleague's definition of the amendment. I have a 
letter here from the Attorney General that says that under this new 
definition, section 702 could never be used to target any entity inside 
the United States, including, for example, business, home, or place of 
worship. I will work with colleagues to further refine this definition 
within the IAA bill that we take up this year.
  I yield the balance of my time to Senator Rubio.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. RUBIO. Briefly, this is actually pretty narrowly tailored even 
though it is written in the way it is. It is tough to talk about in 
this setting. The information is available to all the Members and has 
been now for 5 or 6 days.
  It is actually narrowly tailored to a very specific problem that was 
identified by the court. Basically the FISA

[[Page S2924]]

Court of Review said that if there is an unintended gap in coverage 
revealed by their interpretation, you have to go to Congress to fix it. 
That is what this tries to do. It is important.
  As I said, that information has been available to Members in the 
appropriate setting for the last few days.
  I hope we can defeat this amendment. It is actually a 21st-century 
solution to a unique problem in an era in which telecommunications is 
rapidly evolving, and so are our adversaries.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, this matter that came from the House of 
Representatives has not been narrowly drafted. It is not technical. The 
reason you know that is they keep coming up with exceptions. The rule 
is so broad, and then they keep adding all these exceptions. This is a 
deeply flawed proposal that comes from the House.
  I urge my colleagues to vote yea on this.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 1820

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  Mr. WYDEN. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Cortez 
Masto), the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin), and the Senator 
from Georgia (Mr. Warnock) are necessarily absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. 
Capito), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from 
Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).
  The result was announced--yeas 34, nays 58, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 146 Leg.]

                                YEAS--34

     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Booker
     Braun
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Coons
     Cramer
     Daines
     Durbin
     Hawley
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lee
     Lummis
     Markey
     Marshall
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Padilla
     Paul
     Sanders
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Tester
     Tuberville
     Van Hollen
     Warren
     Welch
     Wyden

                                NAYS--58

     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Boozman
     Britt
     Budd
     Butler
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Duckworth
     Ernst
     Fetterman
     Fischer
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hyde-Smith
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Lujan
     McConnell
     Moran
     Mullin
     Murkowski
     Ossoff
     Peters
     Reed
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Blackburn
     Capito
     Cortez Masto
     Hagerty
     Manchin
     Schmitt
     Vance
     Warnock
  The amendment (No. 1820) was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will be 2 minutes equally divided for 
debate on the Paul amendment No. 1828.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.


                           Amendment No. 1828

  Mr. PAUL. I call up my amendment No. 1828.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Paul] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 1828.

  The amendment is as follows:

    (Purpose: To prohibit the use of authorities under the Foreign 
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to surveil United States persons, 
 to prohibit queries under such Act using search terms associated with 
United States persons, and to prohibit the use of information acquired 
under such Act in any criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding or 
   as part of any criminal, civil, or administrative investigation.)

       At the end, add the following:

     SEC. 26. LIMITATION ON AUTHORITIES IN FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE 
                   SURVEILLANCE ACT OF 1978.

       (a) Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.--
       (1) In general.--The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act 
     of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:

                        ``TITLE IX--LIMITATIONS

     ``SEC. 901. LIMITATIONS ON AUTHORITIES TO SURVEIL UNITED 
                   STATES PERSONS, ON CONDUCTING QUERIES, AND ON 
                   USE OF INFORMATION CONCERNING UNITED STATES 
                   PERSONS.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Pen register and trap and trace device.--The terms 
     `pen register' and `trap and trace device' have the meanings 
     given such terms in section 3127 of title 18, United States 
     Code.
       ``(2) United states person.--The term `United States 
     person' has the meaning given such term in section 101.
       ``(3) Derived.--Information or evidence is `derived' from 
     an acquisition when the Government would not have originally 
     possessed the information or evidence but for that 
     acquisition, and regardless of any claim that the information 
     or evidence is attenuated from the surveillance or search, 
     would inevitably have been discovered, or was subsequently 
     reobtained through other means.
       ``(b) Limitation on Authorities.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of this Act, an officer of the United States may 
     not under this Act request an order for, and the Foreign 
     Intelligence Surveillance Court may not under this Act 
     order--
       ``(1) electronic surveillance of a United States person;
       ``(2) a physical search of a premises, information, 
     material, or property used exclusively by, or under the open 
     and exclusive control of, a United States person;
       ``(3) approval of the installation and use of a pen 
     register or trap and trace device to obtain information 
     concerning a United States person;
       ``(4) the production of tangible things (including books, 
     records, papers, documents, and other items) concerning a 
     United States person; or
       ``(5) the targeting of a United States person for the 
     acquisition of information.
       ``(c) Limitation on Queries of Information Collected Under 
     Section 702.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     Act, an officer of the United States may not conduct a query 
     of information collected pursuant to an authorization under 
     section 702(a) using search terms associated with a United 
     States person.
       ``(d) Limitation on Use of Information Concerning United 
     States Persons.--
       ``(1) Definition of aggrieved person.--In this subsection, 
     the term `aggrieved person' means a person who is the target 
     of any surveillance activity under this Act or any other 
     person whose communications or activities were subject to any 
     surveillance activity under this Act.
       ``(2) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (3), any 
     information concerning a United States person acquired or 
     derived from an acquisition under this Act shall not be used 
     in evidence against that United States person in any 
     criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding or as part of 
     any criminal, civil, or administrative investigation.
       ``(3) Use by aggrieved persons.--An aggrieved person who is 
     a United States person may use information concerning such 
     person acquired under this Act in a criminal, civil, or 
     administrative proceeding or as part of a criminal, civil, or 
     administrative investigation.''.
       (2) Clerical amendment.--The table of contents preceding 
     section 101 of such Act is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

                        ``TITLE IX--LIMITATIONS

``Sec. 901. Limitations on authorities to surveil United States 
              persons, on conducting queries, and on use of information 
              concerning United States persons.''.
       (b) Limitations Relating to Executive Order 12333.--
       (1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       (A) Aggrieved person.--The term ``aggrieved person'' 
     means--
       (i) a person who is the target of any surveillance activity 
     under Executive Order 12333 (50 U.S.C. 3001 note; relating to 
     United States intelligence activities), or successor order; 
     or
       (ii) any other person whose communications or activities 
     were subject to any surveillance activity under such 
     Executive order, or successor order.
       (B) Pen register; trap and trace device; united states 
     person.--The terms ``pen register'', ``trap and trace 
     device'', and ``United States person'' have the meanings 
     given such terms in section 901 of the Foreign Intelligence 
     Surveillance Act of 1978, as added by subsection (a).
       (2) Limitation on acquisition.--Where authority is provided 
     by statute or by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to 
     perform physical searches or to acquire, directly or through 
     third parties, communications content, non-contents 
     information, or business records, those authorizations shall 
     provide the exclusive means by which such searches or 
     acquisition shall take place if the target of the acquisition 
     is a United States person.
       (3) Limitation on use in legal proceedings.--Except as 
     provided in paragraph

[[Page S2925]]

     (5), any information concerning a United States person 
     acquired or derived from an acquisition under Executive Order 
     12333 (50 U.S.C. 3001 note; relating to United States 
     intelligence activities), or successor order, shall not be 
     used in evidence against that United States person in any 
     criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding or as part of 
     any criminal, civil, or administrative investigation.
       (4) Limitation on united states person queries.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no governmental 
     entity or officer of the United States shall query 
     communications content, non-contents information, or business 
     records of a United States person under Executive Order 12333 
     (50 U.S.C. 3001 note; relating to United States intelligence 
     activities), or successor order.
       (5) Use by aggrieved persons.--An aggrieved person who is a 
     United States person may use information concerning such 
     person acquired under Executive Order 12333, or successor 
     order, in a criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding or 
     as part of a criminal, civil, or administrative 
     investigation.
       (c) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section or the 
     amendments made by this section shall be construed to 
     abrogate jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the United 
     States relating to the exceptions to the warrant requirement 
     of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United 
     States, including the exigent circumstances exception.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, Benjamin Franklin warned us that those who 
would trade liberty for security might wind up with neither, but 
somewhere along the way, we lost our courage. It takes courage to 
defend the Constitution. It takes courage to defend the Fourth 
Amendment. It takes courage to understand that, even when people are 
guilty of crimes, we let them have lawyers. We have open courts. We 
have an adversarial process.
  People think: Well, gosh, a murderer gets a lawyer.
  Yes, everybody in our system gets a lawyer, at least under the system 
of the Fourth Amendment. But as we became fearful of terrorists, we 
said: Well, we can't exist under the Constitution. We have to lower the 
standard of the Fourth Amendment.
  So in 1978, we set up FISA, and it went after foreigners under a 
different standard. It was probable cause, not of a crime but probable 
cause that you are associated with a foreign government.
  And for even myself, I am fine with that for foreigners. But for 
Americans, we still have the Constitution. So my amendment would simply 
say this: You can investigate all the foreigners you want under 702, 
under FISA, whatever you wish for foreigners, but for Americans you go 
to an article III court. They work.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. PAUL. We have prosecuted over 300 terrorists in article III 
courts, and we could do it.
  My amendment says that FISA would only be utilized on foreigners, not 
Americans.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to this amendment. 
This amendment would have the effect of basically destroying section 
702.
  Unfortunately, over the last 20 years--Anwar al-Awlaki, Robert 
Hanssen, Faisal Shahzad--there have been a number of American citizens 
who created terrorists acts that 702 has been used for.
  As a matter of fact, many times, when you start the investigation, 
you don't know if the individual is an American or a foreigner. I 
respectfully ask us to defeat the amendment and give the balance of my 
time to Senator Rubio.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. RUBIO. Anwar al-Awlaki was an American-born cleric who became a 
leader of al-Qaida. Syed Farook was born in America, and he murdered 14 
people in a terrorist attack in San Bernardino. The brothers that 
committed the Boston marathon--one was naturalized, and the other was a 
lawful permanent resident. I could go on and on.
  If we had suspected them of terrorism, we would not have been able 
to--and none of these were prevented. But if these cases emerged today 
and you suspected them of terrorism, under this amendment, you would 
not have been able to surveil them to prevent the terrorist attack. 
Afterward, you could have gone after them, but now it is too late to 
prevent the terrorist attack. That is what this amendment would--that 
is the harm that this amendment, if passed, would create, and I urge 
you to vote against it.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is expired.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 1828

  The question is on agreeing to the amendment No. 1828.
  Mr. PAUL. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Cortez 
Masto), the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin), and the Senator 
from Georgia (Mr. Warnock) are necessarily absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. 
Capito), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from 
Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).
  The result was announced--yeas 11, nays 81, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 147 Leg.]

                                YEAS--11

     Braun
     Daines
     Hawley
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lee
     Lummis
     Marshall
     Paul
     Scott (FL)
     Tuberville

                                NAYS--81

     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Boozman
     Britt
     Brown
     Budd
     Butler
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Ernst
     Fetterman
     Fischer
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Lujan
     Markey
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Moran
     Mullin
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Reed
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott (SC)
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warren
     Welch
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Blackburn
     Capito
     Cortez Masto
     Hagerty
     Manchin
     Schmitt
     Vance
     Warnock
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote the yeas are 11, the nays are 82.
  Under the previous order, requiring 60 affirmative votes for the 
adoption of this amendment, the amendment is not agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 1828) was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will be two minutes for debate, equally 
divided, on the Durbin amendment No. 1841, as modified.
  The Senator from Illinois.


                    Amendment No. 1841, As Modified

  Mr. DURBIN. I call up my amendment No. 1841, as modified, and ask 
that it be reported by number.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Illinois [Mr. Durbin] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 1841, as modified.

  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To prohibit warrantless access to the communications and 
              other information of United States persons)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC. ___. PROHIBITION ON WARRANTLESS ACCESS TO THE 
                   COMMUNICATIONS AND OTHER INFORMATION OF UNITED 
                   STATES PERSONS.

       (a) Definition.--Section 702(f) is amended in paragraph 
     (5), as so redesignated by section 2(a)(2) of this Act--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C); 
     and
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
       ``(B) The term `covered query' means a query conducted--
       ``(i) using a term associated with a United States person; 
     or
       ``(ii) for the purpose of finding the information of a 
     United States person.''.
       (b) Prohibition.--Section 702(f) of the Foreign 
     Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1881a(f)) is 
     amended--

[[Page S2926]]

       (1) by redesignating paragraph (5), as redesignated by 
     section 2(a)(1) of this Act, as paragraph (8);
       (2) in paragraph (1)(A) by inserting ``and the limitations 
     and requirements in paragraph (5)'' after ``Constitution of 
     the United States''; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (4), as added by section 
     16(a)(1) of this Act, the following:
       ``(5) Prohibition on warrantless access to the 
     communications and other information of united states 
     persons.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraphs (B) 
     and (C), no officer or employee of any agency that has access 
     to unminimized communications or information obtained through 
     an acquisition under this section may access communications 
     content, or information the compelled disclosure of which 
     would require a probable cause warrant if sought for law 
     enforcement purposes inside the United States, acquired under 
     subsection (a) and returned in response to a covered query.
       ``(B) Exceptions for concurrent authorization, consent, 
     emergency situations, and certain defensive cybersecurity 
     queries.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply if--
       ``(i) the person to whom the query relates is the subject 
     of an order or emergency authorization authorizing electronic 
     surveillance, a physical search, or an acquisition under this 
     section or section 105, section 304, section 703, or section 
     704 of this Act or a warrant issued pursuant to the Federal 
     Rules of Criminal Procedure by a court of competent 
     jurisdiction;
       ``(ii)(I) the officer or employee accessing the 
     communications content or information has a reasonable belief 
     that--

       ``(aa) an emergency exists involving an imminent threat of 
     death or serious bodily harm; and
       ``(bb) in order to prevent or mitigate the threat described 
     in item (aa), the communications content or information must 
     be accessed before authorization described in clause (i) can, 
     with due diligence, be obtained; and

       ``(II) not later than 14 days after the communications 
     content or information is accessed, a description of the 
     circumstances justifying the accessing of the query results 
     is provided to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, 
     the congressional intelligence committees, the Committee on 
     the Judiciary of the House of Representatives, and the 
     Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate;
       ``(iii) such person or, if such person is incapable of 
     providing consent, a third party legally authorized to 
     consent on behalf of such person, has provided consent for 
     the access on a case-by-case basis; or
       ``(iv)(I) the communications content or information is 
     accessed and used for defensive cybersecurity purposes, 
     including the protection of a United States person from 
     cyber-related harms;
       ``(II) other than for such defensive cybersecurity 
     purposes, no communications content or other information 
     described in subparagraph (A) are accessed or reviewed; and
       ``(III) the accessing of query results is reported to the 
     Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
       ``(C) Matters relating to emergency queries.--
       ``(i) Treatment of denials.--In the event that 
     communications content or information returned in response to 
     a covered query are accessed pursuant to an emergency 
     authorization described in subparagraph (B)(i) and the 
     subsequent application to authorize electronic surveillance, 
     a physical search, or an acquisition pursuant to section 
     105(e), section 304(e), section 703(d), or section 704(d) of 
     this Act is denied, or in any other case in which 
     communications content or information returned in response to 
     a covered query are accessed in violation of this paragraph--

       ``(I) no communications content or information acquired or 
     evidence derived from such access may be used, received in 
     evidence, or otherwise disseminated in any investigation by 
     or in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or before 
     any court, grand jury, department, office, agency, regulatory 
     body, legislative committee, or other authority of the United 
     States, a State, or political subdivision thereof; and
       ``(II) no communications content or information acquired or 
     derived from such access may subsequently be used or 
     disclosed in any other manner without the consent of the 
     person to whom the covered query relates, except in the case 
     that the Attorney General approves the use or disclosure of 
     such information in order to prevent the death of or serious 
     bodily harm to any person.

       ``(ii) Assessment of compliance.--Not less frequently than 
     annually, the Attorney General shall assess compliance with 
     the requirements under clause (i).
       ``(D) Foreign intelligence purpose.--
       ``(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii) of 
     this subparagraph, no officer or employee of any agency that 
     has access to unminimized communications or information 
     obtained through an acquisition under this section may 
     conduct a covered query of information acquired under 
     subsection (a) unless the query is reasonably likely to 
     retrieve foreign intelligence information.
       ``(ii) Exceptions.--An officer or employee of an agency 
     that has access to unminimized communications or information 
     obtained through an acquisition under this section may 
     conduct a covered query of information acquired under this 
     section if--

       ``(I)(aa) the officer or employee conducting the query has 
     a reasonable belief that an emergency exists involving an 
     imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm; and
       ``(bb) not later than 14 days after the query is conducted, 
     a description of the query is provided to the Foreign 
     Intelligence Surveillance Court, the congressional 
     intelligence committees, the Committee on the Judiciary of 
     the House of Representatives, and the Committee on the 
     Judiciary of the Senate;
       ``(II) the person to whom the query relates or, if such 
     person is incapable of providing consent, a third party 
     legally authorized to consent on behalf of such person, has 
     provided consent for the query on a case-by-case basis;
       ``(III)(aa) the query is conducted, and the results of the 
     query are used, for defensive cybersecurity purposes, 
     including the protection of a United States person from 
     cyber-related harms;
       ``(bb) other than for such defensive cybersecurity 
     purposes, no communications content or other information 
     described in subparagraph (A) are accessed or reviewed; and
       ``(cc) the query is reported to the Foreign Intelligence 
     Surveillance Court; or
       ``(IV) the query is necessary to identify information that 
     must be produced or preserved in connection with a litigation 
     matter or to fulfill discovery obligations in a criminal 
     matter under the laws of the United States or any State 
     thereof.

       ``(6) Documentation.--No officer or employee of any agency 
     that has access to unminimized communications or information 
     obtained through an acquisition under this section may access 
     communications content, or information the compelled 
     disclosure of which would require a probable cause warrant if 
     sought for law enforcement purposes inside the United States, 
     returned in response to a covered query unless an electronic 
     record is created that includes a statement of facts showing 
     that the access is authorized pursuant to an exception 
     specified in paragraph (5)(B).
       ``(7) Query record system.--The head of each agency that 
     has access to unminimized communications or information 
     obtained through an acquisition under this section shall 
     ensure that a system, mechanism, or business practice is in 
     place to maintain the records described in paragraph (6). Not 
     later than 90 days after the date of enactment of the 
     Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, the head of 
     each agency that has access to unminimized communications or 
     information obtained through an acquisition under this 
     section shall report to Congress on its compliance with this 
     procedure.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 603(b)(2) is amended, in the matter preceding 
     subparagraph (A), by striking ``, including pursuant to 
     subsection (f)(2) of such section,''.
       (2) Section 706(a)(2)(A)(i) is amended by striking 
     ``obtained an order of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance 
     Court to access such information pursuant to section 
     702(f)(2)'' and inserting ``accessed such information in 
     accordance with section 702(f)(5)''.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. DURBIN. Throughout our history and certainly since 9/11, we have 
been focused on a challenge: Can we keep America safe and still honor 
our Constitution?
  I have been engaged in this debate for quite a few years, and I 
continue with it this evening. Over the course of our history, we have 
seen section 702 misused by our government: 3.4 million American 
conversations were monitored in 1 year; another, 200,000.
  This modification I am suggesting, suggested by the Privacy and Civil 
Liberties Oversight Board, would mean that the Agency would have to 
report for warrants 80 cases a month. That is not too much when we are 
dealing with hundreds of thousands of targets and millions of 
conversations.
  Yes, we can protect the constitutional Bill of Rights and keep our 
country safe. We have got to be mindful that this requires vigilance.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, it is illegal for the U.S. Government or 
any of its Agencies to spy on American citizens. It is illegal. And 
nothing in this bill changes that. The fact is, the House has passed a 
reform bill which has made it far less likely for there to be abuses, 
inadvertent and otherwise, and it has real accountability measures that 
will punish people who abuse these necessary tools.
  The fact of the matter is 702 applies to foreigners overseas, not 
Americans here in the United States. And where there is incidental 
collection, court after court after court has said it does not violate 
the Fourth Amendment. There is no constitutional violation. And if the 
intelligence Agencies want to look further at an American citizen, they 
have to go to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and get a 
warrant to show probable cause that a crime has been committed.

[[Page S2927]]

  If we pass this requirement, it will simply benefit our foreign 
adversaries--Russia, China, Iran, Hamas--just to name a few.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.


                Vote on Amendment No. 1841, as Modified

  The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  Mr. WICKER. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays have been requested.
  Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Cortez 
Masto), the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin), and the Senator 
from Georgia (Mr. Warnock) are necessarily absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. 
Capito), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from 
Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).
  The result was announced--yeas 42, nays 50, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 148 Leg.]

                                YEAS--42

     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Booker
     Braun
     Brown
     Butler
     Cantwell
     Coons
     Cramer
     Cruz
     Daines
     Durbin
     Hawley
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Johnson
     Kaine
     Kennedy
     Lee
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Markey
     Marshall
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Padilla
     Paul
     Sanders
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Smith
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Tuberville
     Van Hollen
     Warren
     Welch
     Wyden

                                NAYS--50

     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Boozman
     Britt
     Budd
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Duckworth
     Ernst
     Fetterman
     Fischer
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Hickenlooper
     Hyde-Smith
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     McConnell
     Moran
     Mullin
     Ossoff
     Peters
     Reed
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Stabenow
     Thune
     Tillis
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Blackburn
     Capito
     Cortez Masto
     Hagerty
     Manchin
     Schmitt
     Vance
     Warnock
  The amendment (No. 1841), as modified, was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will be 2 minutes of debate, equally 
divided, on Lee amendment No. 1840.
  The Senator from Utah.


                           Amendment No. 1840

  (Purpose: To appropriately address the use of amici curiae in Foreign 
Intelligence Surveillance Court proceedings and to require adequate 
disclosure of relevant information in Foreign Intelligence Surveillance 
Act of 1978 applications.)
  Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1840, and I ask 
that it be reported by number.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Utah [Mr. Lee] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 1840.

  (The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of 
Amendments.'')
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
  Mr. LEE. Mr. President, in 2020, 77 Members of this body voted for 
this amendment, and I would love to see the same result today.
  According to the IG report following the Crossfire Hurricane 
investigation, there were a lot of FBI employees who appeared before 
the FISA Court who had made substantial misrepresentations to the FISA 
Court. It is one of the things that can happen in a nonadversarial 
courtroom setting. That is why this amendment that most of us voted for 
just 4 years ago does two things.
  First, it beefs up the ability to have amicus curiae representation 
so that there is an extra set of eyes, not individual lawyers 
representing any one single person, but an extra set of eyes there to 
defend the rights of individual Americans--individual Americans--about 
50,000 of whom are queried without any warrant, in a typical quarter, 
as recently as 2 years ago.
  The second thing it does is it requires the disclosure to the court 
of all material, exculpatory evidence, or impeachment evidence--what we 
would call, in a courtroom, Brady and Giglio evidence--to the court.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. LEE. This is not too much. We should all be able to support this 
just as 77 of us did in 2020.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, there is some validity here, and the bill 
begins to cover some of it, but there is more we can do to fix this.
  In Crossfire Hurricane, particularly in the case of Carter Page, the 
FBI agents lied to the court, and they inserted a dossier that proved 
to be opposition research, which you no longer can do under the reforms 
of this bill. You can no longer also include things like press media 
accounts of the case before them.
  The function of this would be, on the other hand--and this is a real 
application because they would have probably brought it beyond that 
setting. Manuel Rocha was a spy in the Cuban Government, working for us 
as an Ambassador. Now he would have some advocate there arguing on his 
behalf in the court, someone who doesn't even have to have an 
intelligence background, and you may potentially even have to provide 
that advocate with intelligence information as exculpatory even though 
it really isn't exculpatory.
  So this, as drafted, is problematic in the context of what we are 
trying to fix here, especially in light of the reforms that are already 
coming in as part of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, this is the last amendment. If we can get 
this bill passed before 12 midnight, we will meet our goal. I commit to 
working with all to make sure that we continue to review the amicus 
proceedings in the next Intel authorization. So I urge Senators to 
reject the amendment.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 1840

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
  The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays have been called for.
  Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Cortez 
Masto), the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin), and the Senator 
from Georgia (Mr. Warnock) are necessarily absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. 
Capito), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from 
Ohio (Mr. Vance).
  The result was announced--yeas 40, nays 53, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 149 Leg.]

                                YEAS--40

     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Booker
     Braun
     Britt
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Coons
     Cramer
     Cruz
     Daines
     Durbin
     Grassley
     Hagerty
     Hawley
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lee
     Lummis
     Markey
     Marshall
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Padilla
     Paul
     Sanders
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Tuberville
     Van Hollen
     Warren
     Welch
     Wyden

                                NAYS--53

     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Boozman
     Budd
     Butler
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Duckworth
     Ernst
     Fetterman
     Fischer
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hyde-Smith
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Lujan
     McConnell
     Moran
     Mullin
     Ossoff
     Peters
     Reed
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Thune
     Tillis
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Young

[[Page S2928]]


  


                             NOT VOTING--7

     Blackburn
     Capito
     Cortez Masto
     Manchin
     Schmitt
     Vance
     Warnock
  The amendment (No. 1840) was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the bill is 
considered read a third time.
  The bill was ordered to a third reading and was read the third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will now be up to 2 minutes of debate 
equally divided.
  The majority leader.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, in the nick of time, bipartisanship has 
prevailed here in the Senate. We are reauthorizing FISA right before it 
expires at midnight--20 minutes before midnight, as the time is now. 
This bill now goes to the President's desk.
  All day long, we persisted and persisted and persisted in trying to 
reach a breakthrough. In the end, we have succeeded, and we are getting 
FISA done. Democrats and Republicans came together and did the right 
thing for our country's safety. It wasn't easy. People had many 
different views. But we all know one thing: Letting FISA expire would 
be dangerous. It is an important part of our national security to stop 
acts of terror, drug trafficking, and violent extremism.
  Thank you to all of my Senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle 
for their good work in getting this done.


                           Order of Business

  Now, for the information of the Senate, after this vote, we will have 
no further votes this evening. We are working on an agreement for 
consideration of the supplemental. Without an agreement, we will vote 
on laying down the supplemental as soon as we receive it from the House 
tomorrow. But we are working on the agreement now.
  Mark Warner has done a great job here as chairman of the Intelligence 
Committee, and I yield to him for 30 seconds.
  Mr. WARNER. I thank Senator Schumer.
  I just want to say I know these issues are tough. I appreciate all of 
the members of the Intelligence Committee, particularly Senator Rubio.
  For the areas that still need improvement, we commit to work with you 
to make this incredibly important tool more efficiently and effectively 
overseen as well.
  I urge adoption of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?


                           Vote on H.R. 7888

  The bill having been read the third time, the question is, Shall the 
bill pass?
  Mr. GRASSLEY. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays have been requested.
  Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Cortez 
Masto), the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin), and the Senator 
from Georgia (Mr. Warnock) are necessarily absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. 
Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).
  The result was announced--yeas 60, nays 34, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 150 Leg.]

                                YEAS--60

     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Boozman
     Britt
     Budd
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Duckworth
     Ernst
     Fetterman
     Fischer
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hyde-Smith
     Kaine
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Lujan
     McConnell
     Moran
     Mullin
     Murkowski
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Reed
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--34

     Baldwin
     Blackburn
     Booker
     Braun
     Brown
     Butler
     Cantwell
     Cramer
     Cruz
     Daines
     Durbin
     Hagerty
     Hawley
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Johnson
     Lee
     Lummis
     Markey
     Marshall
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Paul
     Sanders
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Tester
     Tuberville
     Van Hollen
     Warren
     Welch
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Capito
     Cortez Masto
     Manchin
     Schmitt
     Vance
     Warnock
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 60, the nays are 
34.
  Under the previous order requiring 60 votes for the passage of this 
bill, the bill is passed.
  The bill (H.R. 7888) was passed.

                          ____________________