Google Inc. et al v. Egger et al

Filing 441

Google Inc. et al v. Egger et al

Doc. 441 Att. 17

Exhibit 18

Dockets.Justia.com

110TH CONGRESS 1st Session SENATE

REPORT 110-209

______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________

FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE ACT OF 1978 AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2007 _______________________

OCTOBER 26, 2007 ­ Ordered to be printed

_______________________

Mr. ROCKEFELLER, from the Select Committee on Intelligence, submitted the following

REPORT

together with

ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS

[To accompany S. 2248]

The Select Committee on Intelligence, having considered an original bill (S. 2248) to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, to modernize and streamline the

Section 202 was narrowly drafted to apply only to a specific intelligence program. Section 202 therefore provides immunity for an intelligence activity involving communications that was designed to detect or prevent a terrorist attack, or activities in preparation for a terrorist attack, that was authorized in the period between September 11, 2001 and January 17, 2007, and that was described in written requests to the electronic communication service provider as authorized by the President and determined to be lawful. The extension of immunity in section 202 reflects the Committee's determination that electronic communication service providers acted on a good faith belief that the President's program, and their assistance, was lawful. The Committee's decision to include liability relief for providers was based in significant part on its examination of the written communications from U.S. Government officials to certain providers. The Committee also considered the testimony of relevant participants in the program. The details of the President's program are highly classified. As with other intelligence matters, the identities of persons or entities who provide assistance to the U.S. Government are protected as vital sources and methods of intelligence. But it reveals no secrets to say ­ as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, this bill, and Title 18 of the U.S. Code all make clear ­ that electronic surveillance for law enforcement and intelligence purposes depends in great part on the cooperation of the private companies that operate the Nation's telecommunication system. It would be inappropriate to disclose the names of the electronic communication service providers from which assistance was sought, the activities in which the Government was engaged or in which providers assisted, or the details regarding any such assistance. The Committee can say, however, that beginning soon after September 11, 2001, the Executive branch provided written requests or directives to U.S. electronic communication service providers to obtain their assistance with communications intelligence activities that had been authorized by the President. The Committee has reviewed all of the relevant correspondence. The letters were provided to electronic communication service providers at regular intervals. All of the letters stated that the activities had been authorized by the President. All of the letters also stated that the activities had been determined to be lawful by the Attorney General, except for one letter that covered a period of less than sixty days. That letter, which like all the others stated that the activities had been authorized by the President, stated that the activities had been determined to be lawful by the Counsel to the President. The historical context of requests or directives for assistance was also relevant to the Committee's determination that electronic communication service providers acted in good faith. The Committee considered both the extraordinary nature of the time period following the

10