Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

The agency argues that encryption is making it difficult for police to catch dangerous criminals.

The Obama administration is ramping up its campaign to force technology companies to help the government spy on their users.

FBI and Justice Department officials met with House staffers recently for a classified briefing on how encryption is hurting police investigations, according to staffers familiar with the meeting.

The briefing included Democratic and Republican aides for the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, the staffers said. The meeting was held in a classified room, and aides are forbidden from revealing what was discussed.

It's unclear whether the FBI is planning a similar briefing for Senate aides.

Earlier this month, FBI Director James Comey gave a speech arguing that the "post-Snowden pendulum has swung too far," and that police are often now unable to obtain the information they need for an investigation—even after getting a warrant. As a result, child predators, terrorists, and other criminals could go free, he warned.

The speech was prompted by new policies from Apple and Google to provide default encryption on their phones, making it impossible for the companies to give police access to photos, contact lists, and other data stored on devices.

"The FBI has a sworn duty to keep every American safe from crime and terrorism, and technology has become the tool of choice for some very dangerous people," Comey said in the speech at the Brookings Institution.

The FBI chief urged Congress to enact legislation to require tech companies to create a way for police to spy on their users.

A 1994 law, the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, forces telephone companies to build surveillance technologies into their networks to allow law enforcement to install wiretaps. But the law hasn't been updated and doesn't cover new networks and devices.

Comey called for Congress to revise the law to create a "level playing field" so that Google, Apple, and Facebook have the same obligation as AT&T and Verizon to help police.

But the plan faces fierce opposition from tech companies and privacy advocates. They warn that any backdoor for law enforcement could also be exploited by hackers. Forcing U.S. companies to build insecure products will make them less attractive in foreign markets, they claim.

The critics also argue that police often have other ways of legally obtaining information, such as getting warrants for data stored on company servers.

Convincing Congress to enact Comey's proposal will be a tough challenge. In the wake of the Edward Snowden leaks, most lawmakers seem more interested in reining in government surveillance than expanding it.

This piece originally appeared on National Journal, an Atlantic partner site.

More from National Journal:

How Does Clinton Overcome Obama?

Long-Dead Bigamist Congressman Still Haunts South Jersey

Brazil’s Dangerous Climate Spiral

About the Author

Most Popular

  1. Design

    How 'Maintainers,' Not 'Innovators,' Make the World Turn

    We need more stories about the labor that sustains society, a group of scholars say.

  2. A photo of an abandoned building in Newark, New Jersey.
    Equity

    The 10 Cities Getting a Philanthropic Boost for Economic Mobility

    An initiative funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Ballmer Group focuses on building “pipelines of opportunity.”

  3. Design

    A Designer’s Airport for the Jet Age

    As this 1958 Charles and Ray Eames film shows, Dulles was truly designed for modern air travel.

  4. A map of apartment searches in the U.S.
    Maps

    Where America’s Renters Want to Move Next

    A new report that tracks apartment searches between U.S. cities reveals the moving aspirations of a certain set of renters.

  5. A man walks by an abandoned home in Youngstown, Ohio
    Life

    How Some Shrinking Cities Are Still Prospering

    A study finds that some shrinking cities are prosperous areas with smaller, more-educated populations. But they also have greater levels of income inequality.

×