Legislators in 6 States Want to Pull the Plug on NSA Spying—Some Literally

Bills range from non-cooperation to cutting off water and power to the agency’s facilities.

<a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/s/pulling+the+plug/search.html?page=1&thumb_size=large">Jaros</a>/Shutterstock and <a href="http://sayitaintsoalready.com/2013/06/06/folks-we-have-bipartisanship-in-washington/nsa-logo-6-6-13/">SayItAintSoAlready.com</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Frustrated with the limited scope of the reforms to the National Security Agency detailed by President Obama on Friday, and the slow pace of Congress in addressing the issue, civil liberties advocates are increasingly taking the privacy fight to state capitols. This month, lawmakers in six states introduced versions of model legislation designed to deny the NSA state resources or cooperation from state officials. The bills cover everything from banning evidence collected by the NSA from being introduced in state courts to shutting off the supply of water and electricity to the agency’s in-state data centers.

“I think there is a value in the message that it sends to DC, which is, ‘We’re not gonna put up with it.'”

“If the feds aren’t going to address the issue, then it’s up to the states to do it,” says David Taylor, a GOP member of the Washington state House of Representatives whose Yakima Valley district hosts an NSA listening post. Taylor’s bipartisan bill, introduced last week, would cut off “material support, participation or assistance” from the state and its contractors to any federal agency that collects data or metadata on people without a warrant. Practically speaking, it would mean severing ties between the NSA and state law enforcement, blocking state universities from serving as NSA research facilities and recruiting grounds, and cutting off the water and power to the agency’s Yakima facility.

Similar bills, some of them less broad, have been floated in California, Oklahoma, Indiana, Missouri and Kansas. Others are expected in coming months in Michigan, Arizona, and Utah. Unlike the symbolic resolutions that oppose the NSA’s warrantless spying, which have passed the Pennsylvania House and the California Senate, few, if any, of the more consequential anti-NSA bills are likely to become law. But their existence underscores the depth of grassroots opposition to the agency’s dragnet surveillance programs, and the willingness of lawmakers from both parties to take a stand.

“I think there is a value in the message that it sends to DC, which is, ‘We’re not gonna put up with it,'” says Hanni Fakhoury, a staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “It encourages lawmakers in DC to actually do something about the problem.”

Most of the bills are based on model legislation crafted by OffNow, an ideologically diverse coalition organized by the Tenth Amendment Center—which has also fought to repeal Obamacare and federal marijuana laws—and the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, a civil liberties group advised by well known anti-establishment figures such as Daniel Ellsburg and Naomi Wolf. Activists belonging to Anonymous and Occupy groups have also lent support to the effort under the Twitter hashtag #NullifyNSA. The idea, says Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin, was to “get a bunch of people who would probably grab at each others’ throats on most issues and say, ‘Let’s get something done.'”

“We’re not telling state officials to violate the law; we’re just telling them to not support the NSA in violating our rights.”

The idea of severing state ties with certain federal agencies isn’t as far-fetched as it may seem. Last year, California Governor Jerry Brown signed a law that shields illegal immigrants arrested on suspicion of various crimes from being turned over to federal immigration authorities, and another law barring state cooperation with any effort by the feds to detain people indefinitely under the National Defense Authorization Act. Washington State and Colorado, of course, don’t cooperate with the Drug Enforcement Administration’s efforts to arrest and prosecute growers and users of recreational marijuana.

“This is similar in concept,” says California Senator Ted Lieu, a Democrat from Western Los Angeles County, who introduced an anti-NSA bill earlier this month. “We’re not telling state officials to violate the law; we’re just telling them to not support the NSA in violating our rights.”

The OffNow organizers are particularly eager to introduce a version of their bill in Utah, where the NSA is building a new $1.5 billion, 100,000-square-foot data center in the desert near the town of Bluffdale. To cool its massive computer servers, the center will require some 1.7 million gallons of water daily. The campaign is urging people to ask Utah legislators to turn off the tap:

The Tenth Amendment Center’s Boldin acknowledges that it probably won’t happen; the data center is a popular in Utah for the boost that it will provide to the local economy. But he holds out hope that one or two of the other state measures might pass. “Each small step builds to something greater,” he says. “At least, that is the goal.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate