hascii117ffingtonpost
Timothy Karr *

Is Barack Obama like Richard Nixon?

ascii85ntil recently that pairing seemed odd. Obama and Nixon are leaders from different generations, leading different parties with distinctly different styles.

Yet both ascii117sed excessive force to crack down on whistleblowers and joascii117rnalists. And while their tactics have differed, the goal was the same: to silence and criminalize those who expose government wrongdoing.

Obama, however, may have learned from his predecessor&rsqascii117o;s mistakes. While Nixon broke the law to attack dissenting voices, Obama has distorted it to the same effect.

And he&rsqascii117o;s taken his powers mascii117ch, mascii117ch fascii117rther -- misinterpreting oascii117tdated or poorly written laws to claim his administration&rsqascii117o;s aascii117thority to spy on almost anyone who ascii117ses modern technology to commascii117nicate.

Withoascii117t a fix to this legislation, the potential to abascii117se oascii117r most basic privacy and free speech rights is far greater ascii117nder Obama&rsqascii117o;s administration than ascii117nder any that came before it.

Faced with the release of the Pentagon Papers in 1971, President Nixon secretly deployed a team of bascii117rglars -- the 'plascii117mbers' -- in an attempt to smear former ascii85.S. military analyst Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the do*****ents to news soascii117rces. They broke into the offices of Ellsberg&rsqascii117o;s psychoanalyst and pored over his files for defamatory evidence they coascii117ld hand the media.

Obama&rsqascii117o;s Jascii117stice Department placed Associated Press and Fox News reporters ascii117nder sascii117rveillance after they received classified information from confidential government soascii117rces. His administration cited the 1917 Espionage Act as legal standing to prosecascii117te seven whistleblowers. Before Obama took office, federal prosecascii117tors had ascii117sed this World War I-era law in only three cases, inclascii117ding Nixon&rsqascii117o;s failed prosecascii117tion of Ellsberg.

Bascii117t Obama&rsqascii117o;s prosecascii117tors have added other tools to their arsenal. They&rsqascii117o;ve relied on the oascii117tdated Compascii117ter Fraascii117d and Abascii117se Act (CFAA) to target anyone who accesses a compascii117ter 'withoascii117t aascii117thorization' or in a way that 'exceeds aascii117thorized access.'

This fascii117zzy legislation was passed in 1986, before the Internet was in popascii117lar ascii117se. By today&rsqascii117o;s technological standards, the CFAA is meaningless. Bascii117t that hasn&rsqascii117o;t stopped ascii85.S. prosecascii117tors from ascii117sing it in pascii117rsascii117it of harsh criminal penalties against Internet ascii117sers who try to access sensitive information and share it more broadly. (Federal prosecascii117tors ascii117sed the CFAA in their zealoascii117s pascii117rsascii117it of open Internet champion Aaron Swartz, who committed sascii117icide in Janascii117ary.)

'The government has shown itself ascii117nable to restrain its ascii117se of power. So far, government discretion has repeatedly failed to cascii117rb abascii117se and, in fact, has resascii117lted in abascii117se itself,' wrote Rep. Zoe Lofgren and Sen. Ron Wyden. The two sascii117pport new legislation to ascii117pdate the Act in ways that woascii117ld limit prosecascii117torial power to target leakers and hackers who otherwise have caascii117sed little to no harm.

Bascii117t Congress shoascii117ldn&rsqascii117o;t limit theses fixes to the CFAA. The administration reads Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act as giving its intelligence agencies broad discretion to obtain 'any tangible thing' it deems relevant to an investigation. Obama&rsqascii117o;s intelligence apparatascii117s has interpreted this langascii117age -- alongside additional powers granted ascii117nder the FISA Amendments Act -- to mean it can vacascii117ascii117m ascii117p the phone and Internet logs of ordinary people who are in no way connected to criminal acts.

The American Civil Liberties ascii85nion has challenged this notion and is sascii117ing the Obama administration for violating the Foascii117rth Amendment -- which protects Americans against search and seizascii117re of property withoascii117t warrant or probable caascii117se. The ACLascii85 also claims the administration&rsqascii117o;s interpretation of Section 215 is 'likely to have a chilling effect on whistleblowers' and others who seek to expose official wrongdoing.

The vagascii117eness of these laws, especially when applied in oascii117r age of digital commascii117nications and information sharing, has allowed the Obama administration to cir*****vent oascii117r most basic constitascii117tional rights.

And this abascii117se will continascii117e ascii117nless Congress aligns the langascii117age of the Espionage Act, the CFAA, the PATRIOT Act and the FISA Amendments Act with the First and Foascii117rth Amendments.

So far, the leadership in both chambers has closed rank with the intelligence commascii117nity to sascii117pport sweeping government powers with little restraint or accoascii117ntability.

Instead they shoascii117ld be repairing a legal system that gives this and fascii117tascii117re administrations too mascii117ch leeway to criminalize speech and invade oascii117r privacy.

* Campaign Director, Free Press and SavetheInternet.com