Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) has accused American law enforcement agencies of conducting widespread surveillance on U.S. citizens and residents under a covert initiative known as the Hemisphere Project. This secret program, allegedly infringing on Fourth Amendment privacy rights, enables police to sift through trillions of phone records without apparent regard for citizen’s privacy and even without obtaining warrants.
Senator’s Concerns and Call for Transparency
Senator Wyden contends that these searches, which he claims occur “usually” without warrants, have been shrouded in secrecy for over a decade. In a letter addressed to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, Wyden expressed serious reservations about the legality of the Hemisphere Project. He is now urging the Justice Department to disclose information about what he deems a “long-running dragnet surveillance program.”
The Hemisphere Project Details
Operating under the Hemisphere Project, the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) allegedly pays telecommunications giant AT&T to provide federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies with the capability to search trillions of domestic phone records dating back to at least 1987. This includes the addition of four billion call records daily. AT&T, however, declined to provide specific details, stating that any information would be disclosed under subpoena, warrant, or court order.
Search Requests and Scope
Senator Wyden asserts that law enforcement agencies, both federal and state, can request Hemisphere searches with a subpoena. Notably, many agencies possess the authority to issue subpoenas themselves. Furthermore, the searches are not limited to drug-related investigations. They can be requested by law enforcement agencies across the country.
Hemisphere’s Secrecy and Legal Implications
The Hemisphere Project first came to public attention in a 2013 New York Times report, which suggested that the scale and longevity of data storage under this program surpass other government initiatives, including the NSA’s phone call logs gathering under the Patriot Act. Despite not being classified, the Justice Department has labeled Hemisphere documents as “Law Enforcement Sensitive,” hindering their public release due to potential harm to ongoing investigations.
Call for Transparency and Removal of Designation
Senator Wyden is pushing for the removal of the “Law Enforcement Sensitive” designation, arguing that it hampers public oversight. Additionally, he highlights that Hemisphere evades a federal Privacy Impact Assessment due to its unique funding structure. Instead of the White House directly paying AT&T, the ONDCP grants funds to the Houston High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, which, in turn, pays AT&T to operate the surveillance program.
Scope of Hemisphere’s Surveillance
Quoting a law enforcement official, Wyden describes Hemisphere as “AT&T’s Super Search Engine” and “Google on Steroids.” The program reportedly enables the retrieval of location data and “two levels of call detail records for one target number.” This implies that Hemisphere searches can pull in phone records of everyone who communicated with the target of an investigation, suggesting a broad and invasive surveillance net.
Legislative Response
Senator Wyden’s letter to the Justice Department coincides with the introduction of the Government Surveillance Reform Act by lawmakers from both parties in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. The act proposes the requirement of an independent court order before allowing the surveillance of Americans’ phone records. This legislative move underscores the growing concerns about the unchecked power of surveillance programs like the Hemisphere.
As the Hemisphere Project comes under scrutiny, the call for transparency and accountability intensifies. Senator Wyden’s allegations raise significant questions about the balance between national security concerns and the protection of individual privacy. With lawmakers pushing for reforms, the Hemisphere Project may face increased public and legislative scrutiny in the quest for a more transparent and accountable surveillance landscape.
