Several lawmakers praised Monday’s ruling by the U.S. District...

Several lawmakers praised Monday’s ruling by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that National Security Agency phone surveillance likely violates the Fourth Amendment (CD Dec 17 p3). Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Mark Udall, D-Colo., praised the ruling on Monday. But Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., pointed to other legal support for surveillance and said the Supreme Court must resolve the question. “Clearly we have competing decisions from those of at least three different courts (the FISA Court, the D.C. District Court and the Southern District of California),” Feinstein said in a statement Tuesday (http://1.usa.gov/19QvjQn). “I have found the analysis by the FISA Court, the Southern District of California and the position of the Department of Justice, based on the Supreme Court decision in [1979’s Smith v. Maryland], to be compelling.” Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., author of the original Patriot Act and the surveillance overhaul the USA Freedom Act, said the decision “highlights the need to pass” his legislation, according to his office (http://1.usa.gov/1bMrU8n). “I am encouraged by the district court’s ruling,” Sensenbrenner said. “It will add to the growing momentum behind the USA FREEDOM Act, which has garnered support from a large, diverse bloc of my colleagues and the business community. The Executive Branch should join Congress to institute meaningful reform.” Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Tom Udall, D-N.M., Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rand Paul, R-Ky., support the ruling and back updates to surveillance law. The ruling “hits the nail on the head,” Wyden said (http://1.usa.gov/1gD2yOA), in particular highlighting the ruling’s emphasis on the ineffectiveness of the surveillance. “This ruling dismisses the use of an outdated Supreme Court decision affecting rotary phones as a defense.” Paul said the ruling is “an important first step in having the constitutionality of government surveillance programs decided in the regular court system rather than a secret court where only one side is presented,” calling phone surveillance an abuse (http://1.usa.gov/18Oxu6G). “Today’s ruling is an important first step toward reining in this agency but we must go further,” Sanders said (http://1.usa.gov/IRlBX6). “I will be working as hard as I can to pass the strongest legislation possible to end the abuses by the NSA and other intelligence agencies.” Blumenthal backed congressional action, “creating greater transparency and a special advocate whose client is the Constitution to advocate on behalf of Americans’ liberty and privacy,” he said (http://1.usa.gov/1hYbYEO). Tom Udall said he hopes Monday’s “ruling will prove to be an important milestone on the path toward increased transparency and comprehensive reforms to our surveillance programs, including an end to bulk phone record collection and the creation of a new privacy advocate within the secretive FISA court” (http://1.usa.gov/18SLmQl). Privacy advocates and Edward Snowden, the former NSA contractor responsible for the surveillance leaks earlier this year, also hailed the ruling.