TexasCHLforum.com

A Senate proposal touted as protecting Americans' e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, giving government agencies more surveillance power than they possess under current law.

CNET has learned that Patrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to law enforcement concerns. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantless access to Americans' e-mail, is scheduled for next week.

Leahy's rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies -- including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission -- to access Americans' e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge.

It's an abrupt departure from Leahy's earlier approach, which required police to obtain a search warrant backed by probable cause before they could read the contents of e-mail or other communications. The Vermont Democrat boasted last year that his bill "provides enhanced privacy protections for American consumers by... requiring that the government obtain a search warrant."

{snip}

Revised bill highlights
✭ Grants warrantless access to Americans' electronic correspondence to over 22 federal agencies. Only a subpoena is required, not a search warrant signed by a judge based on probable cause.
✭ Permits state and local law enforcement to warrantlessly access Americans' correspondence stored on systems not offered "to the public," including university networks.
✭ Authorizes any law enforcement agency to access accounts without a warrant -- or subsequent court review -- if they claim "emergency" situations exist.
✭ Says providers "shall notify" law enforcement in advance of any plans to tell their customers that they've been the target of a warrant, order, or subpoena.
✭ Delays notification of customers whose accounts have been accessed from 3 days to "10 business days." This notification can be postponed by up to 360 days.

Rex B wrote:Sure would be helpful if the actual bill number were posted, just in case someone wanted to write his or her representative.

S.1011
Latest Title: Electronic Communications Privacy Act Amendments Act of 2011
Sponsor: Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] (introduced 5/17/2011) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 5/17/2011 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Rex B wrote:Sure would be helpful if the actual bill number were posted, just in case someone wanted to write his or her representative.

WildBill wrote:

Rex B wrote:Sure would be helpful if the actual bill number were posted, just in case someone wanted to write his or her representative.

Vote for it and once it's passed you can see what it says.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Rex B wrote:Sure would be helpful if the actual bill number were posted, just in case someone wanted to write his or her representative.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:s.01011:

S.1011
Latest Title: Electronic Communications Privacy Act Amendments Act of 2011
Sponsor: Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] (introduced 5/17/2011) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 5/17/2011 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

That's the original bill. What's being done here is a rewrite of that bill before it gets out of committee.

dave_in_austin wrote:Leahy has evidently dropped the bill.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552 ... ance-bill/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

dave_in_austin wrote:Leahy has evidently dropped the bill.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57552 ... ance-bill/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;