some would say the nsls are like a grand jury subpoena. and you can have the can have t nonjudicial review and so on. do you agree with that? >> there is an overlap and the fbi has been driving that analogy. there's also another analogy, 215 itself where we recommend the certain process that's more consistent with the normal one for getting access to people's records. we think if 215 has the structure it should, then the national security letter should follow the same structure, that the situation between them is extremely hard to justify. there is a earn analogy to the administrative subpoena, a question with breadth and scope and we think given the urgency exception that of course there would be to treat the national security letter like a 215 record seeking would not compromise any national security goal. >> thank you. and thanks, senator grassley to intrude one more question. i'll say this to mr. morell, we've heard some government officials talk about section 215 programs. they say we shouldn't -- americans shouldn't be concerned abou

to ensure that nsl gag orders comply with the first amendment. and to provide recipients of nsl was a meaningful opportunity for judicial review. something that most americans would assume already exists. and the review group makes a series of important recommendations to change the way national security letters operate. we haven't seen as much about these recommendations in the press vice president generated that much -- as much attention but they should. and i think that we have to look at it. and the report also recommends creating an institutional public interest advocate at the fisa court. i strongly support that proposal. i'm concerned that merely allowing to participate in the fisa court from time to time will neither improve the substantive outcome of the proceedings nor rebuild public confidence in the process. and the stakes are high. quh you think about we're really having a debate about what are americans fundamental relationship with their own government. the government exists for americans. not the other way around. and about whethe

the fbi can impose a permanent gag order on nsl recipients. and number of us have been trying to reform that. haven't hadndations as much attention as other topics covered by the report, but i think they are just as important. professor swire, how did the review group arrived at its conclusions regarding nsl's? >> thank you, mr. chairman. -- the group it amongst us includes 3 law legal matters one we were particularly involved. we went to the fbi and interviewed fbi counsel in detail. we also amongst us had worked quite a bit on issues related to nsl's previously. of the things we focused on was the so-called gag orders or nondisclosure orders. in the criminal world, when there is an organized crime investigation, there is often nondisclosure orders on the order of 45 to 60 days. we found out that they are either permanent or come up for review for the first time in 50 years under current law for nsl's. that is very different from the way that grand jury subpoenas or investigations on the criminal side happened. the lack of disclosure and the