50 U.S.C. § 1872

Declassification of significant decisions, orders, and opinions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 50 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Declassification required

Subject to subsection (b), the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall conduct a declassification review, to be concluded as soon as practicable, but not later than 180 days after the commencement of such review, of each decision, order, or opinion issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (as defined in section 1871(e) of this title) that includes a significant construction or interpretation of any provision of law, including any novel or significant construction or interpretation of the term “specific selection term”, and, consistent with that review, make publicly available to the greatest extent practicable each such decision, order, or opinion.

(b) Redacted form

The Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Attorney General, may satisfy the requirement under subsection (a) to make a decision, order, or opinion described in such subsection publicly available to the greatest extent practicable by making such decision, order, or opinion publicly available in redacted form.

(c) National security waiverThe Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Attorney General, may waive the requirement to declassify and make publicly available a particular decision, order, or opinion under subsection (a), if—(1) the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Attorney General, determines that a waiver of such requirement is necessary to protect the national security of the United States or properly classified intelligence sources or methods; and(2) the Director of National Intelligence makes publicly available an unclassified statement prepared by the Attorney General, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence—(A) summarizing the significant construction or interpretation of any provision of law, which shall include, to the extent consistent with national security, a description of the context in which the matter arises and any significant construction or interpretation of any statute, constitutional provision, or other legal authority relied on by the decision; and(B) that specifies that the statement has been prepared by the Attorney General and constitutes no part of the opinion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review.(Pub. L. 95–511, title VI, § 602, as added Pub. L. 114–23, title IV, § 402(a)(2), June 2, 2015, 129 Stat. 281; amended Pub. L. 118–49, § 7, Apr. 20, 2024, 138 Stat. 873.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2024—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 118–49 inserted “, to be concluded as soon as practicable, but not later than 180 days after the commencement of such review,” after “shall conduct a declassification review”.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 2017–2019 · leading case: Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. Dep't of Just., 296 F. Supp. 3d 109 (D.C. Cir. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. Dep't of Just., 296 F. Supp. 3d 109 (D.C. Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “at 11), which is a statute that requires the Director of National Intelligence to "make publicly available to the greatest extent practicable each [ ] decision, order, or opinion" of the FISC "that includes a significant construction or interpretation of any provision of law[,]"…”

Elec. Frontier Found. v. U.S. Dep't of Just., 376 F. Supp. 3d 1023 (N.D. Cal. 2019). · cites it 7× “Relevant here, Section 402 of the USA FREEDOM Act ("Section 402"), codified as 50 U.S.C.A. § 1872 , requires conditional declassification of certain FISC and FISCR opinions: *1029 Declassification Required.”

Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. Dep't of Just. (D.D.C. 2017). · cites it 2× “at 11), which is a statute that requires the Director of National Intelligence to “make publicly available to the greatest extent practicable each [] decision, order, or opinion” of the FISC “that includes a significant construction or interpretation of any provision of law[,]”…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.