WASHINGTON-The Clinton administration last week proposed updating wiretap laws for the Internet Age, despite concerns that federal law enforcement already may be exceeding constitutional privacy rights with a new system that conducts Internet surveillance.
On Monday, the House Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution, chaired by Rep. Charles Canady (R-Fla.), will hold a hearing on the FBI Internet wiretap tool dubbed `Carnivore.’
The White House wiretap initiative, briefly described last Monday by White House Chief of Staff John Podesta, will update current wiretap law and harmonize the law for different technologies.
“Our aim should be to enhance law enforcement’s ability to address unlawful conduct, but also to enhance privacy and civil liberties on the Internet,” said Podesta at the National Press Club.
It is unclear whether the Justice Department, which likely will draft the legislation, is fully supportive. Any internal differences within the administration likely would delay the submission of proposed wiretap legislation to Congress.
The White House proposal comes at a time of growing wireless and Internet convergence and uncertainty as well as confusion over the reach of existing wiretap law.
Indeed, the mobile-phone industry, privacy advocates and others are in court challenging Federal Communications Commission rules that implemented the 1994 digital wiretap act. The groups claim FCC wiretap guidelines go beyond what Congress intended and violate privacy rights.
The lawsuit, pending before the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, could be decided later this summer. Oral argument in the case was held in mid-May.
In late June, Congress gave the FBI the flexibility to negotiate directly with wireless carriers and manufacturers insofar as compensating firms for networkwide digital wiretap upgrades required by law.
The wiretap challenge confronting the White House is twofold. One the one hand, federal law enforcement wants to be sure it can conduct authorized eavesdropping on new digital networks. This is viewed as a legitimate concern, given the fact that criminals and terrorists have become sophisticated users of high technology.
On the other hand, there is growing concern that in its zeal to keep wiretaps as a tool for catching suspected criminals, the FBI may be assuming greater wiretap authorities at the expense of private citizens.
In the past, when the FBI conducted wiretaps, officials captured only telephone numbers and voice communications. That’s all the law allowed. In the Digital Age, what’s picked up by wiretap includes content that may not be under the purview of law enforcement.
Alan Davidson, staff counsel for the Center for Democracy and Technology, said the administration’s initiative has good and bad points. Davidson said he welcomed efforts to make the wiretap law technology-neutral.
At the same time, Davidson said the wiretap proposal appears to make it too easy for law enforcement to collect some digital information.
“We’re concerned that the standard for government access to sensitive information online needs to be much higher than it is today and higher than what the White House proposed,” said Davidson.
Davidson said the CDT finds the FBI’s Carnivore wiretap system troubling.
“Nobody knows what system really does and what limits there are on sucking information out of the Internet,” he added.
