Obama should rein in the NSA

The right to privacy is essential to a free, self-governing society. Excessive surveillance and unjustified secrecy threaten civil liberties and the public trust, undermining the foundation of American democracy and the very vitality of the United States. No government agency, even if it protects national security, should be above the law.

Those core beliefs were true before Islamic terrorists struck the United States with unprecedented force on Sept. 11, 2001. They remain true today, obscured though they have been these past 12 years, as the United States’ retaliation for those attacks morphed into a global war on terror.

That ongoing, amorphous conflict is transpiring during a technological era that makes unfettered spying possible as never before. The National Security Agency’s unyielding reach capitalizes on fearful Americans’ reluctance to question government actions they suspect violate their rights, but hope make them safer.

Now the pendulum is swinging back toward privacy and civil liberties, with events this week in the legal, political and international arenas repudiating the NSA’s dragnet surveillance, seeking to rein in the agency and questioning the very assumptions that helped fuel its power.

This scrutiny is welcome, and seriously overdue. The NSA must change its tactics, and recent developments will hasten that.

» On Monday, a federal judge in the District of Columbia ruled that the NSA’s daily collection of virtually all Americans phone records is almost certainly unconstitutional, finding a likely violation of the privacy protection against unreasonable searches guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment. Moreover, the judge is unconvinced that the "almost-Orwellian technology" that allows the government to collect, store and analyze phone metadata has ever actually identified a terrorist in a time-sensitive crisis. The judge stayed his ruling pending government appeal, putting in motion a judicial process that may reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

» On Wednesday, a presidential advisory panel called on the government to cease its bulk-data collection and to make other NSA surveillance programs more transparent and accountable. The legal and intelligence experts commissioned by President Barack Obama make 46 specific recommendations that balance the need to protect both national security and individual rights. Even more strongly than the federal court ruling, the 308-page report states that the NSA’s indiscriminate data sweep was not necessary to prevent terrorist attacks.

» Also on Wednesday, the United Nations’ General Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution to protect the right to privacy against unlawful surveillance in the Internet era. Germany and Brazil — whose leaders’ cellphones were monitored by the NSA — introduced the resolution, which "affirms that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, including the right to privacy." Although not legally binding, U.N. resolutions reflect world opinion and carry political weight. This one reflects the most concerted global criticism of U.S. eavesdropping to date.

Clearly, the tide is turning, and it’s about time. While the milestone federal ruling makes its way through the courts and the U.N.’s opinion is strictly advisory, the presidential panel’s recommendations provide an opportunity for quick action.

President Obama has the authority to end the NSA’s indiscriminate and unjustified collection of phone metadata and he should do so, adopting the panel’s recommendation. Just because the NSA has the technological capability to collect and store this information doesn’t mean it should.

Americans should no longer stand for relinquishing fundamental rights in exchange for a false sense of security. That’s when the terrorists truly win.