Court Rules Warrantless Digital Searches Violate Constitution

Clear Facts

• A federal court ruled warrantless “back door” digital searches under FISA Section 702 unconstitutional.
• Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall’s ruling came in the case against Agron Hasbajrami, who was convicted of terrorism charges.
• The ruling highlighted the need for reform of Section 702, with privacy advocates urging Congress to implement changes.

In a significant victory for privacy advocates, a federal court has declared warrantless “back door” digital searches unconstitutional. This decision challenges the current practices under the FISA Section 702 program, which has allowed federal authorities to search digital databases without a warrant. These searches often involve data unrelated to the original subject of investigation, a practice that has been approved by both major political parties despite ongoing objections from privacy rights groups.

Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall of the Eastern District of New York delivered this ruling in the case against Agron Hasbajrami, who faced terrorism charges. Hasbajrami was apprehended in 2011 while attempting to travel to Pakistan to “join a terrorist organization, receive training, and ultimately fight against U.S. forces and others in Afghanistan and Pakistan,” according to federal agents.

The Department of Justice later revealed that some of the evidence used in Hasbajrami’s conviction stemmed from information obtained without a warrant under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act. The case was subsequently reviewed by Judge Hall, who ruled against the Biden administration. She concurred with Hasbajrami’s argument that “inadvertent acquisition of Defendant’s communications does not automatically permit the government to search among the acquired communications without a warrant.”

Despite this ruling, Hasbajrami will remain incarcerated. A representative from a civil liberties organization commented on the decision, stating, “While the new opinion holds that the FBI’s Section 702 queries violated the Fourth Amendment, the court ultimately denied the defendant’s motion to suppress the resulting evidence on separate grounds.”

The representative further emphasized the importance of the ruling, noting, “As the court recognized, the FBI’s rampant digital searches of Americans are an immense invasion of privacy and trigger the bedrock protections of the Fourth Amendment. Section 702 is long overdue for reform by Congress, and this opinion shows why.”

The ruling, issued in December, was made public only recently. There are contrasting views on Section 702, with some officials supporting the program while others initially opposed it but later changed their stance.

Federal law enforcement officials have consistently advocated for the program, describing it as “invaluable” and “indispensable” for capturing terror suspects. However, some organizations have called for the program’s end in April 2026, urging Congress to oppose its extension.

“In light of this ruling, we ask Congress to uphold its responsibility to protect civil rights and civil liberties by refusing to renew Section 702 absent a number of necessary reforms, including an official warrant requirement for querying U.S. persons’ data and increased transparency,” an organization stated.

They further stressed, “We expect any lawmaker worthy of that title to listen to what this federal court is saying and create a legislative warrant requirement so that the intelligence community does not continue to trample on the constitutionally protected rights to private communications.”

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Source