the line of sight in some of the technology that is available to us today. the stakeholders, i mean, it's all over. and because if not, your regulations become the throttle or the choke that keeps innovation from moving us forward and ultimately, we will lose out to competition, do i have your commitment that you will look at that aggressively? >> we will. and i think granting the bnsf railroad authority to operate beyond line of sight is part of that. >> thank you. i yield back. >> i want to thank the panel members for your help this morning.

all persons having business before the honorable supreme court of the united states are admonished to draw near and give their attention. >> number 759 petitioner versus arizona. >> read your arguments number 18, roe against wade. >> marbury madison is probably the most important case this court ever decided. >> slavery wasn't legally recognized. >> putting the brown decision into effect would take presidential orders and the presence of federal troops and

marshals and the courage of children. >> we wanted to pick cases that changed the direction and import of the court in society and that also changed society. >> so she told them that they'd have to have a search warrant, and mrs. mapp demanded to see the paper and to read it, see what it was, which they refused to do, so she grabbed it out of his hand to look at it. thereafter the police officer handcuffed her. >> i can't imagine a better way to bring the constitution to life than by telling the human stories behind great supreme court cases. >> fred korematsu boldly opposed the forced internment of japanese americans during world war ii. after being convicted for failing to report for

relocation, mr. korematsu took his case all the way to the supreme court. >> quite often in many of our most famous decisions are ones that the court took are quite unpopular. >> if you had to pick one freedom that was the most essential to the functioning of a democracy, it has to be freedom of speech. >> let's go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually what it means to live in a society of 310 million different people who help stick together because they believe in a rule of law. >> landmark cases, an exploration of 12 historic supreme court decisions and the human stories behind them. a new series on c-span produced in cooperation with the national constitution center debuting monday, october 5th, at 9:00

p.m. as a companion to our new series, "landmark cases" the book. it features the 12 cases with a brief introduction in the backgrou background, highlights, and impact of each case. published by c-span in cooperation with congressional quarterly press. "landmark cases" is available for 8.95, plus shipping and handling. coming up tomorrow here on c-span 3, we'll show you a hearing on the gold king mine spill in colorado where millions of gallons of toxic wastewater were discharged into waterways. environmental protection agency administrator and sally jewel testify. that'll be before the natural resources committee. it started tomorrow morning at 10:00 eastern here on c-span 3. a number of bills are

pending on capitol hill that aim to update the electronics communications privacy act, a move that the white house and tech community supports. but witnesses from the federal trade commission and securities and exchange commission, who testified before the senate judiciary committee today, say they would not be able to obtain information on cloud services. here's the hearing. it's two hours and 20 minutes. today's hearing is intended to help inform the committee about the most recent views of a wide variety of stake holders concerning the need to reform the electronic communication privacy act or as we know it around here ecpa and various ways of fixing it. the committee's last hearing on the topic was four and a half

years ago. since then, numerous proposals have been advanced by members of the committee. in 1986, congress enacted ecpa to protect the privacy of americans electronic communication and to provide the government with a means to access these communications and related records in certain circumstances. however, dramatic changes in the use of communication technology have occurred since 1986. americans now depend on e-mail, text messages, social networking websites, web-based apps, and countless other electronic communication methods on a daily basis. and more than ever these communications are being retained in some form due to dramatic reduction in the cost of storing data in the cloud. these communication technologies are enriching all of our lives.

they're a great help to me in keeping in touch with my constituents in iowa and for the most part we have american technology companies to thank for this digital revolution. these companies are now a significant engine of growth for our economy but creating an increasingly global market for these communication technologies. but of course these technologies are also being used every day by those who intend to do our society great harm, terrorists, violent drug dealers, child predators, environmental criminals, and you can go on and on. these technologies create a digital trail that is often essential to bringing these offenders to justice. in light of these changes, there's a growing consensus that ecpa must be modernized to adapt to this new landscape, and whatever updates to the law we

make, of course, must be consistent with people's protections under the fourth amendment. the privacy and technology communities have criticized ecpa for failing to provide sufficient privacy safety guards for individual's stored electronic communications. indeed given the way americans use e-mail today, it hardly makes sense that the privacy protections for an e-mail should turn on whether it's more than 180 days old or whether it's been opened. at the same time, law enforcement officials have expressed concern with certain aspects of the current ecpa framework and how it currently works in practice. and they are concerned that reform efforts to a statute they use every day do not unduly

hamper the effort to investigate violations of law. both the department and the civil law enforcement agencies have expressed the need to address an emerging gap in their authority in the target of the investigation fails to respond to lawful civil process for e-mail evidence in the target's possession. they contend that this gap could allow offenses such as civil rights violations, security fraud, and consumer fraud to go unpunished. in addition, many state and local law enforcement officials are frustrated with the current

timeliness and quality of responses by providers. unlike traditional search warrants, law enforcement agencies cannot control how quickly they obtain evidence through ecpa warrants. they rely on the providers to conduct the searches for them. to these officials, any heightening of ecpa's legal standards should be accompanied by changes to the law that ensure that they receive the information they need timely. in addition, some officials have expressed concern that the voluntary nature of ecpa's emergency exception can result in unacceptable delay in important cases. for example, when a child is abducted. closely related to these concerns is the ongoing issue of encryption and the going dark problem, which the committee recently held a hearing on.

this is another example of a situation where agents may need the legal standards to obtain critical evidence but then are not able to access it quickly enough or even at all. as i said at our last hearing on ecpa, the reform that we discussed in 2011, if we're considering changes to legal standard under ecpa, we should also, as i said, quote, be working to ensure that these same problems are granting law enforcement the necessary access to address the going dark issue. i sent a letter to deputy attorney general last week to get an update from the department about how that process is proceeding. reforming ecpa's treatment of stored electronic communications therefore is a complicated and potentially far-reaching endeavor that sits at the

intersection of -- [ cell phone ringing ] that's bad. i'm sorry. that sits at the intersection of privacy rights of the public, the investigative need of law enforcement officials, society's interest in encouraging and expanding commerce, and the dictates of our important constitution. the key is to strike the right balance between these interests as ranking member leahy declared at our last hearing on the topic 2011, quote, meaningful ecpa reform must carefully balance privacy rights, public safety, and security, end of quote. i agree. i'm grateful for the presence of all the witnesses today, and i now recognize senator leahy. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i remember when electronic communications act was passed 29 years ago. in fact, the final -- i was talking to the former director of the fbi last month in vermont when we worked out the very final parts of my capitol office at 10:00, 11:00 at night. we passed it. keep in mind, those calls were on landlines at that time. call waiting was novel. few had heard of e-mail, but we did figure there would be new electronic communications, and we thought ecpa could provide that. but there are now many ways that

nobody could have anticipated that we're communicating. the privacy rules concerning this are simply outdated. government agencies can obtain the contents of an e-mail without a warrant if that e-mail is more than 180 days old. well, we don't expect our private letters or photos stored at home to lose fourth amendment protections because they're more than six months old. now, tomorrow is a major historical date in iowa. it's senator grassley's birthday. i think they declare it as a day of public rejoicing, but if i sent him a note, which i've actually written, to him and he

puts that note in his desk, handwritten note in his desk, somebody's going to have to have a warrant to go and get it. i didn't put anything in there to justify the warrant, but if i sent him a text and that's stored in the cloud, why should it be any different? why shouldn't somebody just be able to take it out? we introduced the ecpa act to bring privacy protection from the digital world. in the house, even more. 300 co-sponsors. both parties support the bill. an extraordinary coalition of industry and civil society supports this bill. the senate for democracy and technology, heritage action, the

aclu. usually representatives of those people have to have an arbitrator get on an elevator with them if they're all in there together, but they agree with this. i think to use a technical term passing this is a no-brainer. five years ago, the u.s. court of appeals in the sixth circuit found the contents of e-mail fully protected by the fourth amendment regardless of its age, and that's effectively become the rule nationwide. service providers no longer turn over the contents of e-mails without a warrant. we simply codify current practice. some have raised concerns the bills would have for civil regulatory agencies such as the fcc. we wanted these agencies to be

effective, but there's nothing in our constitution that says only certain agencies have to follow the constitution. others don't have to. fcc has not been able to obtain e-mails without a warrant because of the 2010 federal court ruling and our bill doesn't change that, so i'm disappointed the commerce department wasn't asked to join the panel given its important perspective. this is an important issue. thank you. happy birthday a day early. >> thank you. before i introduce the panel, i would want to put some letters that we received outlining concerns of the current ecpa reform proposals from law

enforcement agencies. five i will name. the national association of assistant u.s. attorneys, federal law enforcement officers association, the major county sheriffs association, the national district attorneys association, the iowa county attorneys association. i would ask without ththat thes objection will entered into the record. she worked in the office of white house counsel and served as the assistant u.s. attorney d.c. before that, she was a policy counsel for the national partnership for women and families. she has a law degree from the

university of michigan. our second witness, andrew s ceresney. before joining fcc, he was a partner at a law firm where he has practiced white collar criminal investigations. prior to that, he served as assistant district attorney in new york. third witness, daniel salsburg is the chief council of the office o technology, research, and investigation. before that, he was a senior trial attorney for commodity

cftc. mr. salsburg received his undergraduate and law degree from the university of pennsylvania. i want to thank all of you for testifying. >> chairman grassley, ranking member leahy, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the department of justice regarding the electronics communications privacy act or ecpa. i look forward to discussing with the committee how the department uses ecpa and how the statute might be updated and improved. ecpa has always sought to improve -- while safe guarding individual privacy. it is important that ecpa reform efforts remain focused on maintaining both goals. electronic communications play a vital role in government