Former New Jersey Superior Court Judge Andrew Napolitano voiced important concerns on Newsmax regarding the reauthorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), suggesting that intelligence agencies hold compromising information on members of Congress, which he believes influences their decisions to enhance the agencies’ budgets and spying powers.
During his appearance on “Carl Higbie FRONTLINE,” Napolitano explained that his assertions are based on information from sources within the ex-intelligence community.
He raised alarming accusations about the extent of domestic surveillance, including claims that American intelligence agencies have spied on Congress and the Supreme Court.
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Credits: Station HYPO)
This, he suggested, creates a coercive dynamic where lawmakers may feel pressured to support intelligence programs out of fear of having personal information leaked or used against them.
Napolitano also reflected on the broader implications of such surveillance practices, lamenting the shift in governmental power dynamics since the era of James Madison, where he argues that government actions required public permission, whereas now, the public often needs government permission to act.
The House recently passed the reauthorization of FISA with a vote split among both major parties, leading to discussions about the balance between national security needs and the protection of individual privacy rights.
Andrew Napolitano (Credits: Politico)
Napolitano specifically criticized the defeat of an amendment proposed by Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., which would have required law enforcement to obtain a warrant to access communications involving U.S. citizens collected during foreign surveillance operations.
He argued that this amendment was sensible and in line with Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, expressing disappointment over its rejection by Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.
These remarks by Napolitano highlight deep-seated concerns about privacy and civil liberties as related to government surveillance capabilities and suggest a need for ongoing scrutiny and debate over the legal frameworks that govern intelligence activities.
