<\/p>\n
Sen. Ron Wyden<\/span>, D-Ore., keeps getting under the skin of the NSA\u2019s biggest supporters with his warnings about intelligence agency abuses \u2014 and the latest dispute resulted in a high-profile dustup on the Senate floor on Thursday.<\/p>\n Wyden said the public needs to know about a secret court opinion that found fault with the Trump administration\u2019s use of data collected by the National Security Agency, prompting Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Tom Cotton, R-Ark., to warn of \u201cconsequences\u201d for \u201cdistorting highly classified material.\u201d<\/p>\n The unusually pointed back-and-forth came amid a fight over the reauthorization<\/a> of a controversial domestic spying program<\/a>. The barbs exchanged by the senators highlighted how much Wyden has angered colleagues aligned with the NSA who want the spy program to be renewed without changes.<\/p>\n The House of Representatives and Senate have been unable to agree on the future of the program, which is set to expire Thursday night.<\/p>\n Wyden is trying to use that deadline to pry loose the still-classified court opinion, which he says details serious violations of the program\u2019s guidelines.<\/p>\n He is blocking unanimous consent for a 45-day extension of the program, which relies on Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Rather, he wants the Senate to agree to a three-week extension of the surveillance program, along with a provision ordering the Trump administration to declassify the opinion from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cThat ruling found serious violations of Americans\u2019 constitutional rights and how the Trump administration has used Section 702,\u201d Wyden said. \u201cCongress should not vote \u2014 should not vote \u2014 to renew Section 702 when Americans are left in the dark about these troubling abuses,\u201d Wyden said.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Wyden has a long history<\/a> of trying to pry loose evidence of civil liberties violations by intelligence agencies. Most famously, in 2013, he attempted to force<\/a> then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to acknowledge the existence of a phone record dragnet months before NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden\u2019s disclosures<\/a> made it public.<\/p>\n His sometimes-cryptic statements warning about secret spy programs have been dubbed \u201cthe Wyden siren<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n They have also drawn the attention of Cotton, who gave an ominous response when Wyden accused him of ducking the court opinion.<\/p>\n \u201cI am ducking nothing. I am pointing out the senator from Oregon\u2019s long-standing practice of distorting highly classified material in public,\u201d Cotton said<\/a>. \u201cOne of these days there are going to be some consequences, and it may be while I\u2019m the chairman of this committee.\u201d<\/p>\n Cotton\u2019s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Members of Congress are protected from prosecution for comments they make on the floor under the speech or debate clause of the Constitution.<\/p>\n Little has been revealed about the court opinion besides a New York Times report<\/a> earlier this month that it centered on searches of information about Americans in a vast database of communications that gets around laws on domestic spying because the data is collected abroad.<\/p>\n Wyden noted that current law already requires the court opinion to be declassified and released to the public at some point. He wants that process sped up so that it can take place before Congress votes on a long-term extension of the surveillance program.<\/p>\n \u201cIt sure feels like the other side of the aisle is covering the abuses up.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/figure>\n \u201cCongress must use a short-term extension to openly debate the critical issues in front of the American people. I am disappointed that, instead, it sure feels like the other side of the aisle is covering the abuses up,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Wyden said a three-week extension would be \u201cmore than reasonable,\u201d noting that Congress has<\/a> had months to negotiate<\/a> over the program during which little happened, before it became clear that privacy advocates had the votes to block an extension of the law without reforms.<\/p>\n That period is not long enough, Cotton argued, because with a planned weeklong break, senators would have only a short time to hold closed-door meetings on legislation.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n\n