28 May 1999
Source:
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/1999/May/219ag.htm
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AG
THURSDAY, MAY 27, 1999
(202) 616-2777
WWW.USDOJ.GOV
TDD (202) 514-1888
STATEMENT OF ATTORNEY GENERAL JANET RENO
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- "The Department of Justice is charged with
protecting the security of this Nation and the liberty of its
people, and I take those two responsibilities very, very much to
heart.
"To protect national security while guarding the liberty of its
people, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
in 1979. This Act is known as FISA and it requires that before
the government can wiretap or conduct an electronic surveillance
of a U.S. citizen for intelligence purposes, it must obtain
approval from a Judge by presenting evidence sufficient to show
probable cause to believe certain things.
"Those certain facts are that a particular U.S. person knowingly
engages in clandestine intelligence gathering activities on
behalf of a foreign power which may involve a violation of the
criminal statutes of the United States.
"Congress required this specific showing for a very good reason -
it wanted to protect the rights of U.S. citizens to be free from
unreasonable searches as guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.
"In the investigation of espionage at the Department of Energy
laboratories, the Department was asked whether surveillance or
wiretaps could be authorized. Based on the facts reported to us
in 1997, the Department determined that the evidence was
insufficient to support a finding of probable cause. But as in
all cases it was prepared to continue to review the matter to
determine if there was additional evidence that could be used to
show probable cause. Although Eric Holder and I did not
personally review the matter at the time, I have since reviewed
the case and I agree with the findings made by the career lawyers
in the Department of Justice.
"As in all cases where questions are raised concerning how we
handled a matter, we are going to review everything that we did
to see if there is anything that should have been done
differently, in order to ensure our national security, and to do
everything possible in the future.
"When I took this job, I swore to uphold the Constitution and the
laws of the United States. I believe that it is my sworn duty to
ensure that only FISA cases with evidence sufficient to show the
"probable cause" required by the statute are presented to the
Court.
"Our efforts to fight crime and to protect the national security
can require the government to intrude into the homes of American
citizens or listen to their telephone conversations in certain
instances. But the same law that allows the courts to authorize
such intrusion, says it can only be done if the probable cause
standards set by Congress, Courts and the Constitution are met.
"Some have said, well, we should simply let the Court decide
whether to authorize a FISA warrant or FISA surveillance. But
that is not what the law says. If I do not believe that the
probable cause standard is met, I can't present to the Court a
FISA application. To do so would violate my oath of office, and I
am not going to do it."
###
99-219