The schedule we are going to start on time. The new time. On behalf of myself and bob bauer who is my supremely wise, talented and collegial codirector of the nyu law schools legislative and regulatory process clinic i wanted to welcome you here today to the fourth o year of the for. We are joined this year by another nyu law entity, the reef center on law and security, a nonpartisan multidisciplinary institute and the director, rachel, who is here has been invaluable in helping pull together the program for this afternoon. This b forum would not be possie without the generous support of sibley austin, a Renowned International law firm and so it gives me great pleasure to introduce to you, peter who is a partner in the chicago office. He knows a lot about what we are talking about today. He served his district in illinois in the u. S. House of representatives for six terms, from 20072019. During that time he held a number of very significant positions. One of those most pertinent to wh
Work of institutions that to oversee the secret you seven telogens collection ranging from the fisa court to the inspectors general to the Government Accountability office to the Intelligence Committee of congress and one of the newer and in many ways most publicly useful entities overseeing the Intelligence Community is the privacy and Civil Liberties has produced ah number of valuable reports that have given us unique insight into some of the programs that were discussed earlier, like section 215, the authority used for the phone records collection. Will be aure fascinating discussion, i will pass off to our accomplished. Oderator you, julian, and thank you all for being here and to those watching online. It is an honor and a pleasure to be a part of the conversation with the members. We have three of the five members with us today. Two had conflicts and were not able to attend. Am going to basically do something nontraditional and allow them to introduce themselves. Ive seen this do
Address that range of topics. To begin, i have a senior counsel and director of the Freedom Technology and security project. It is a time where we hear a lot about the goal of putting America First. Surveillance states, this often creates some friction with our allies. Our goals may conflict with their desire to protect their own citizens. [cheering and applause] thank you. Hello, everyone. Www. Cdt. Org. I want to talk about the Global Implications of what i call America First surveillance policies. U. S. Surveillance policy, particularly on the intelligence side of the equation discriminates against foreigners in a fairly dramatic way when it comes to surveillance that occurs outside the United States inside the United States it is relatively even between americans and foreigners. When they want to survey out a person in the United States and collect their Communications Content for intelligence purposes, it has to show they are in agent of a foreign power. A Foreign Terrorist Organi
For most, in many cases really helps, statutes, house signals authority reaches that office. Ournd, whether constitutional gaps there are constitutional gaps raises questions. Did you state the house itself has the power . Power to issue a subpoena, the house itself . Mr. Consovoy not the constitutional power. The house itself because your argument to me sounded like it was all about the delegation of the committee not being explicit. I have no i find no argument that the house itself he said that house had to be explicit that it was giving what he had to the committee. Mr. Consovoy im sorry, im not getting the house rules state j. Millett including subpoena power . The vast majority, which is whether a subpoena is constitutional. Your first just on constitutional argument given your issues about legislative just to understand, i am understanding trying to understand what your argument is. The house itself would issue a subpoena and we would be over on the rest of the brief oral argume
Versus mazars usa llp and committees on oversight and reform of the United States house of representatives. Mr. Consovoy for the appellants, mr. Leonard for the appellee. Good morning. Good morning. Mr. Consovoy as both the Supreme Court and this court the courts must first answer whether the committee has statutory [indiscernable]. In this case, and for the reason set forth in this courts opinion [indiscernable]. The language in the house rules is not jurisdiction to personally subpoena the president for his private financial records. Foremost, in many cases, and as the office has held, statutes, and here house rules must name the president. There must be a clear statement before their authority may reach that office. Second, as in the Supreme Courts decision, where there are constitutional doubts, the committees authority should be read narrowly not to trigger those serious questions. J. Millett do you dispute that the house itself has this power . Mr. Consovoy it has the statuatory