On January 27, 2014, the Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence announced that the U.S. government will allow Internet companies and telecommunications providers to disclose more information about government demands for customer data in national security investigations.  The government’s new transparency policy addresses legal demands served under two distinct statutory authorities.  First, under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”), the government can apply to the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (“FISC”) for orders compelling providers to disclose both the contents of their customers’ communications as well as non-content “metadata” relating to such communications.  Second, under the National Security Letter (“NSL”) statute, the FBI can compel companies to disclose certain non-content information about their customers.

Under the new policy announced on January 27, technology companies now have two options for reporting on the number of FISA orders and NSLs they receive:

Under the first option, companies may separately report FISA orders seeking content information, FISA orders seeking non-content information, and NSLs.  Each category of legal demand must be reported in bands of 1,000, starting with 0-999.  Companies may also report the number of user accounts affected by each category of demands, again within bands of 1,000.  Under this option, companies may report FISA and NSL numbers (in bands) every six months, but for FISA numbers, there must be a six-month delay between the reporting date and the period in which the orders covered by the report were served.  There is an additional two-year delay for reporting on “New Capability Orders” issued under FISA — i.e., orders that seek communications data from new platforms, products, or services.

Alternatively, under the second option, companies may report the total number of all national security demands they received, including all NSLs and FISA orders, reported as a single number in bands of 250, starting with 0-249.  Companies are also authorized to report the number of accounts affected under all national security orders, again within bands of 250, starting with 0-249.

The government’s new policy comes on the heels of coordinated lawsuits filed in the FISC last year by several large electronic communication service providers seeking a declaration under the First Amendment that they were entitled to report on aggregate data regarding government national security demands.  (Covington represented Microsoft Corporation in that litigation.)  After the government announced its new policy, the companies voluntarily dismissed their lawsuits.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of David Fagan David Fagan

David Fagan co-chairs the firm’s top ranked practice on cross-border investment and national security matters, including reviews conducted by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), and is a partner in the firm’s data privacy and cybersecurity practice.

David has…

David Fagan co-chairs the firm’s top ranked practice on cross-border investment and national security matters, including reviews conducted by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), and is a partner in the firm’s data privacy and cybersecurity practice.

David has been recognized by Chambers USA and Chambers Global for his leading expertise on bet-the-company CFIUS matters and has received multiple accolades for his work in this area, including being named The American Lawyer’s Dealmaker of the Year three times. His work includes successfully securing three of the four Presidential approvals in the history of CFIUS; securing the only Presidential order protecting a client against a proposed hostile takeover; and negotiating the only “golden share” the U.S. government has taken in a U.S. company. Clients laud him for “[seeing] far more matters than many other lawyers,” his “incredible insight,” and “know[ing] how to structure deals to facilitate regulatory reviews” (Chambers USA).

For more than two decades, David has handled transactions for clients across every sector subject to CFIUS review, including some of the most sensitive and complex matters that have set the template for CFIUS compliance and security agreements in their respective industries. He is also routinely called upon to rescue transactions that encounter challenges in CFIUS; provide strategic counsel to clients on navigating and addressing U.S. national security considerations in commercial transactions; and negotiate solutions with the U.S. government, including equity arrangements, that protect national security interests while preserving shareholder value and U.S. business interests.

In the enforcement area, David has represented clients in numerous enforcement actions pursued by CFIUS, including two of the three largest penalty cases resolved with CFIUS.

Reflecting his experience on complex U.S. national security matters intersecting with China, David is regularly engaged by the world’s leading multinational companies to advise on emerging legal issues, including outbound investment restrictions and regulations governing information and communications technologies and services (ICTS), as well as strategic legal projects related to the evolving U.S.-China competitive landscape. 

In addition, in the foreign investment and national security area, David routinely advises clients on matters requiring mitigation of foreign ownership, control, or influence (FOCI) under applicable national industrial security regulations. His work includes advising many of the world’s leading aerospace and defense companies and private equity firms, as well as telecommunications transactions subject to public safety, law enforcement, and national security review by Team Telecom.

Photo of Jim Garland Jim Garland

Jim Garland’s practice focuses on government investigations and enforcement matters, litigation, and cybersecurity. Recognized by Chambers USA as a leading practitioner in both the white collar and cybersecurity categories, Jim draws upon his experience as a former senior Justice Department official to advise…

Jim Garland’s practice focuses on government investigations and enforcement matters, litigation, and cybersecurity. Recognized by Chambers USA as a leading practitioner in both the white collar and cybersecurity categories, Jim draws upon his experience as a former senior Justice Department official to advise clients on sensitive, multidimensional disputes and investigations, often with national security implications. He previously served as co-chair of Covington’s “Band 1”-ranked White Collar and Investigations Practice Group and currently is a member of the firm’s Management and Executive Committees.

Jim regularly represents corporate and individual clients in government investigations and enforcement actions. He has successfully handled matters involving allegations of economic espionage, theft of trade secrets, terrorism-financing, sanctions and export control violations, money laundering, foreign bribery, public corruption, fraud, and obstruction of justice. He has particular expertise advising clients in connection with investigations and disputes involving electronic surveillance and law enforcement access to digital evidence.

Jim has substantial experience litigating high-stakes, multidimensional disputes for clients across a range of industries, including companies in the high-tech, financial services, defense, transportation, media and entertainment, and life sciences sectors. Many of his civil representations have substantial cross-border dimensions or involve parallel government enforcement proceedings in multiple forums.

In conjunction with his investigations and litigation practice, Jim regularly assists clients with cybersecurity preparedness and incident-response matters. He helps clients in assessing security controls and in developing policies and procedures for the protection of sensitive corporate data. He also regularly assists companies in responding to significant cybersecurity incidents, including in connection with criminal and state-sponsored attacks targeting customer and employee data, financial information, and trade secrets.

From 2009 to 2010, Jim served as Deputy Chief of Staff and Counselor to Attorney General Eric Holder at the U.S. Department of Justice. In that role, he advised the Attorney General on a range of enforcement issues, with an emphasis on criminal, cybersecurity, and surveillance matters.