Report finds big drop in FBI's use of intelligence database to search for information on Americans
New federal statistics show a steep decrease in the number of times the FBI searched a vast foreign intelligence repository for information about Americans and others in the United States last year.
The number of 'U.S. person queries' plunged from 57,094 in 2023 to 5,518 in 2024, according to the report published Monday by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
The report details the use of a surveillance program, known as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, that allows the U.S. government to collect without a warrant the communications of targeted foreigners located in other countries — including when they are in contact with Americans or other people inside the U.S.
National security officials have said the program is vital to protecting the country, but civil liberties advocates have condemned it as a violation of Americans' privacy.
The report concludes that the decrease is due in large part to the adoption of tighter rules governing the program, including a requirement that the FBI enter a justification for a database query about an American before conducting it.
The numbers have dropped consistently in recent years. In 2022, the FBI racked up nearly 120,000 U.S. person queries.
Former President Joe Biden signed legislation reauthorizing the surveillance law last year after debates over civil liberty protections nearly forced the statute to lapse.
A key source of concern — uniting an unusual alliance of far-right Republican supporters of President Donald Trump with Democratic champions of civil liberties — is that FBI analysts have repeatedly run improper or unjustified database queries about people in the U.S.
The surveillance tool was first authorized in 2008.
The latest figures are included in an annual report, mandated by law, that provides statistical data about a broad array of the U.S. government's surveillance powers.
The FBI had no immediate comment on the report.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
36 minutes ago
- NBC News
Trump speech at Fort Bragg prompts new questions, concerns about politicization of military
WASHINGTON — Defense Department officials say troops who cheered and jeered Tuesday at President Donald Trump's political statements at a rally at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, did not violate military regulations, but a former military legal officer said they did just that. During the speech, uniformed soldiers yelled in support of Trump's political statements and booed former President Joe Biden and California Gov. Gavin Newsom. 'Do you think this crowd would have showed up for Biden? I don't think so,' Trump said to boos about Biden. Trump made other comments about Newsom and about Karen Bass, the mayor of Los Angeles, where protests against the administration's crackdown on immigrants have been taking place and where Trump has ordered thousands of National Guard members and active-duty Marines deployed in response. Other Trump comments about the 'fake news media,' transgender people, protesters in California and flag-burning also drew boos from the uniformed military members in attendance. Trump is known for his rallies at which he goes after and pokes fun at political enemies and other issues, but typically he makes those remarks at political events, not on U.S. military bases. Such overt political activity on a base is the prerogative of the commander in chief. But military leaders would typically frown upon troops' reacting the way they did as inconsistent with military good order and discipline, and, according to one expert, it is a violation of military regulations found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, or UCMJ. Presidents of both parties often use troops as political props and put them and their commanders in difficult positions by doing so, but Trump's speech took that to a new level, said Geoffrey DeWeese, a retired judge advocate general who is now an attorney with Mark S. Zaid PC. (Zaid has represented whistleblowers on both sides of the aisle, including one who filed a complaint about Trump's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in 2019 that led to Trump's impeachment, and he was one of the people whose security clearances Trump revoked this year.) 'It's a sad tradition to use the military as a backdrop for political purposes,' DeWeese said. 'To actively attack another president or a sitting governor and incite the crowd to boo, that's a step in a dangerous direction, that really says we want to politicize the military, that sends a bad message.' DeWeese said there were likely to have been violations of the UCMJ. 'I would be cringing if I was a senior officer and it happened under my watch,' he said. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said repeatedly that he wants to take politics out of the military by removing diversity, equity and inclusion programs and banning service by transgender service members. Kori Schake, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who worked at the State Department and the National Security Council under former President George W. Bush and at the Pentagon under former President George H.W. Bush, said in an email that commanders at Fort Bragg should have done a better job preparing troops there. 'It's terrible,' she wrote. 'It's predictably bad behavior by the President to try and score political points in a military setting, and it's a command failure by leaders at Ft Bragg not to prepare soldiers for that bad behavior and counsel them not to participate.' The Pentagon said in a statement that there had been no violation of the UCMJ and suggested the media was against policies that Trump has championed. Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell also alleged in a statement that the media 'cheered on the Biden administration' and its policies regarding the Defense Department 'when they forced drag queen performances on military bases, promoted service members on the basis of race and sex in violation of federal law, and fired troops who refused an experimental vaccine.' 'Believe me, no one needs to be encouraged to boo the media,' Parnell said. 'Look no further than this query, which is nothing more than a disgraceful attempt to ruin the lives of young soldiers.' On Wednesday, Army officials at Fort Bragg addressed the sale of some MAGA merchandise at the event, which was planned in cooperation with a nonpartisan organization, American 250. 'The Army remains committed to its core values and apolitical service to the nation,' Col. Mary Ricks, a spokeswoman for the Army's 18th Airborne Corps at Bragg, said in a statement. 'The Army does not endorse political merchandise or the views it represents. The vendor's presence is under review to determine how it was permitted and to prevent similar circumstances in the future.' The Army's own new field manual, published recently, says the apolitical nature of being a U.S. soldier is what contributes to the public trust. The Army 'as an institution must be nonpartisan and appear so, too,' says the new field manual, 'The Army: A Primer to Our Profession of Arms.' 'Being nonpartisan means not favoring any specific political party or group. Nonpartisanship assures the public that our Army will always serve the Constitution and our people loyally and responsively.' U.S. troops can participate in political functions, just not while on duty or in uniform, the book says. 'As a private citizen you are encouraged to participate in our democratic process, but as a soldier you must be mindful of how your actions may affect the reputation and perceived trustworthiness of our Army as an institution,' it says.
BBC News
40 minutes ago
- BBC News
Aukus: US to review submarine pact as part of 'America First' agenda
The US has launched a review of its multi-billion dollar submarine deal with the UK and Australia, saying the security pact must fit its "America First" the trilateral pact, widely seen as a response to the growing power of China, Australia is to get its first nuclear-powered subs from the US, before the allies create a new fleet by sharing cutting-edge Australia and the UK - which did its own review last year - have sought to play down news of the US probe, saying it is natural for a new administration to move comes as Australia faces pressure from the White House to lift its military spending, from 2% to 3.5% of GDP, a push so far resisted by Canberra. The agreement - worth £176bn ($239bn; A$368bn) - was signed in 2021, when all three countries involved had different leaders."The department is reviewing Aukus as part of ensuring that this initiative of the previous administration is aligned with the President's America First agenda," a US defence official told the BBC."As [US Defense] Secretary [Pete] Hegseth has made clear, this means ensuring the highest readiness of our servicemembers, that allies step up fully to do their part for collective defense, and that the defense industrial base is meeting our needs."The review will be headed up Elbridge Colby, who has previously been critical of Aukus, in a speech last year questioning why the US would give away "this crown jewel asset when we most need it".Defence Minister Richard Marles, speaking to local Australian media on Thursday morning local time, said he was optimistic the deal would continue. "I'm very confident this is going to happen," he told ABC Radio Melbourne."You just need to look at the map to understand that Australia absolutely needs to have a long-range submarine capability."Some in Australia have been lobbying for the country to develop a more independent defence strategy, but Marles said it was important to "stick to a plan" - a reference to the previous government's controversial cancellation of a submarine deal with France in favour of Australian government spokesperson told the BBC it was "natural" that the new administration would "examine" the agreement, adding the UK had also recently finished a review of the security pact between the long-standing allies. There is "clear and consistent" support for the deal across the "full political spectrum" in the US, they said, adding Australia looked forward to "continuing our close cooperation with the Trump Administration on this historic project".A UK defence spokesperson told the BBC it was "understandable" for a new administration to look at the deal, "just as the UK did last year". Aukus is a "landmark security and defence partnership with two of our closest allies", the spokesperson said, and "one of the most strategically important partnerships in decades, supporting peace and security in the Indo-Pacific and Euro-Atlantic".
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Trump claims rare earths deal 'done' with China
When Trump announced sweeping tariffs on imports from a number of countries earlier this year, China was the hardest hit. China responded with its own higher rates on US imports, triggering further tit-for-tat increases. In May, talks held in Switzerland led to a temporary truce that Trump called a "total reset". It brought Trump's new US tariffs on Chinese products down from 145% to 30%, while Beijing slashed levies on US imports to 10% and promised to lift barriers on critical mineral exports. It gave both sides a 90-day deadline to try to reach a trade deal. But the US and China subsequently claimed breaches on non-tariff pledges. In his social media post, Trump said the US would have tariffs on Chinese goods of 55%, but officials said the figure included tariffs put in place during his first term. Markets showed little response to the deal, which Terry Haines, founder of the Washington-based consultancy Pangaea Policy, described as having both "very limited scope and unfinished status". "Setting the Geneva 'pause' back on track is the smallest of accomplishments, and doesn't suggest that a broad US-China trade deal or geopolitical rapprochement is any closer in the foreseeable future," he wrote.
