WASHINGTON — Former Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has changed her position on a controversial government program she once tried to repeal as she battles for confirmation to become Donald Trump’s director of national intelligence.
During her time in Congress, Gabbard, a former Democrat who has embraced Trump, advocated ending the so-called Section 702 authority that allows the government to track foreigners outside the U.S. suspected of espionage.
Critics have labeled the September 11, 2001-era program as “surveillance without guarantee” because it has sometimes been misused to track American citizens.
With her confirmation in doubt in the Republican Party-controlled Senate, Gabbard is making clear to key Republican senators that she would maintain the program if she were to join Trump’s administration.
“If appointed DNI, I will uphold Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights while preserving essential national security tools like Section 702 to ensure the safety and freedom of the American people,” Gabbard said in a statement which was obtained on Friday by Punchbowl News.
Gabbard’s about-face on Section 702 comes just one day after Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, suggested she join the program during a interview with The Wall Street Journal.
“Well, now she’s going to be the spokesperson for the 702 authority,” Lankford told the outlet.
He added: “It’s a legitimate question to just say, ‘Okay, how are you going to handle this?’ What does that mean?’ Because if she comes out and says, ‘No, I want to stand up to all 702 authorities,’ that literally shuts down our entire national defense meeting.”
It’s unclear how Gabbard’s warming to Section 702 will affect her support among libertarian-leaning GOP senators like Mike Lee (Utah) and Rand Paul (Ky.). Paul, another critic of the surveillance program, supported Gabbard’s appointment last month. He said at a time when her appointment would send a message that “the days of the intelligence community operating as an inexplicable black box are over.”
Paul’s office did not immediately return a request for comment.
Less hawkish Trump supporters had cited Gabbard’s nomination as evidence that he would stand up to neoconservatives within the Republican Party and the national security establishment, calling her a “historical choice against the deep state.” But Gabbard’s acquiescence to one of the intelligence world’s biggest demands quickly dismayed civil liberties and privacy advocates.
“Gabbard’s opinion on FISA Section 702 reminds us that relying on a politician to protect your constitutional rights is usually a bad bet,” Patrick Eddington, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, told HuffPost. “And if she approves of the law as it was expanded last year, is that really the person who should run America’s intelligence apparatus?”
Jonathan Nicholson contributed reporting.
