General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Let's Be Clear, say Legal Experts, What NSA Is Doing Is 'Criminal' [View all]wtmusic
(39,166 posts)"Scope and limits
For most purposes, including electronic surveillance and physical searches, "foreign powers" means a foreign government, any faction(s) or foreign governments not substantially composed of U.S. persons, and any entity directed or controlled by a foreign government. §§1801(a)(1)-(3) The definition also includes groups engaged in international terrorism and foreign political organizations. §§1801(a)(4) and (5). The sections of FISA authorizing electronic surveillance and physical searches without a court order specifically exclude their application to groups engaged in international terrorism. See §1802(a)(1) (referring specifically to §1801(a)(1), (2), and (3)).
The statute includes limits on how it may be applied to U.S. persons. A "U.S. person" includes citizens, lawfully admitted permanent resident aliens, and corporations incorporated in the United States.
The code defines "foreign intelligence information" to mean information necessary to protect the United States against actual or potential grave attack, sabotage or international terrorism.
In sum, a significant purpose of the electronic surveillance must be to obtain intelligence in the United States on foreign powers (such as enemy agents or spies) or individuals connected to international terrorist groups. To use FISA, the government must show probable cause that the target of the surveillance is a foreign power or agent of a foreign power."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act
Indiscriminately intercepting the calls of every U.S. citizen fails miserably under this criterion, and as I noted in another post this whole "metadata" issue is a distraction (whether the content is read or interpreted is not material to interception).
onedit: I was wrong that FISA does not permit interception of wholly domestic calls - IF the target of the surveillance is a foreign power or agent of a foreign power. The upshot is the same, and the reason why the administration is grasping at straws with their oopsy-daisy defense.