Abstract
Given technological advancements and the increased sophistication of criminal enterprises, the federal government has had to adjust its tactics and electronic surveillance practices to detect and disrupt criminal activities. Throughout the 1900s, evolving case law interpreted Fourth Amendment concerns distilled through concerns for civil liberties and rights violations. Attempting to balance these concerns, Congress implemented Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), which provides statutory requirements for domestic and foreign intelligence practices respectively. The following is a qualitative content analysis utilizing a nonprobability, purposive sampling of relevant court cases to assess the development of FISA. Findings reveal that FISA is the inevitable result of criticisms for a statutorily mandated judicial approval process to regulate foreign intelligence electronic surveillance practices for national security matters. Additionally, criticisms present during the pre-FISA debate have remained consistent in post-FISA years. These criticisms are evident through FISA amendments implemented with the enactment of the USA PATRIOT Act and the FISA Amendments Act, which expanded the use of electronic surveillance.