ic governance framework Overvie

The United States has a multi-layered framework of 

rules and oversight designed to ensure that we exercise 

our authorities and use our capabilities properly. The 

rules are intended to authorize – and restrict – intelligence activities. These rules are in place to ensure that 

intelligence agencies conduct their activities in a manner that complies with the laws and policies established 

by our democratic institutions.

Intelligence Community (IC) elements must satisfy 

their duty to uphold the Constitution by abiding by 

requirements imposed by the Constitution, as well as 

applicable statutes, executive orders, and presidential 

directives. Oversight, by all three branches of the government, is designed to ensure the IC’s activities are 

consistent with our rules and our values.

rules

As a general matter, the U.S. has rules to ensure that 

intelligence agencies act within their authorities and 

missions, while comporting with the requirements of 

the Constitution and other applicable laws. The rules 

require a focus on national intelligence, pursuant to 

priorities established by the nation’s leaders. 

Additionally, specific rules exist regarding the collection, retention and dissemination of foreign intelligence information. These rules are derived from 

different sources. For example:

• Statutes – Relevant statutes include the Foreign 

Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the Privacy 

Act, and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). 

In turn, these statutes may call for implementing 

regulations, policies and procedures. For example, FISA requires that the government must have 

court-approved procedures governing how it will 

conduct the surveillance of and protect information about “United States persons.” Generally 

speaking, a United States person is a U.S. citizen, 

a Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR), a U.S. corporation, or an unincorporated association in the 

United States substantially composed of U.S. citizens and LPRs. Under FISA, the government may 

not intentionally target a U.S. person for electronic 

surveillance or physical search without an individualized court order, based on probable cause 

to believe that the target is an agent of a foreign 

power. If the government incidentally acquires the 

communications of a U.S. person who is communicating with a FISA target, the government 

must protect that information in accordance with 

court-approved “minimization procedures.”

• Executive Orders (EO) – EO 12333 has the force 

of law for intelligence agencies and imposes key 

restrictions on intelligence activities, including on 

how information concerning U.S. persons can be 

collected, retained and disseminated.

• Presidential Policy Directives (PPD) – PPDs are 

another mechanism by which the president establishes rules. PPD-28 regarding Signals Intelligence 

Activities (SIGINT) is directed at intelligence 

agencies. It requires that intelligence agencies develop policies to extend certain protections to all 

people, regardless of nationality, that are comparable to the protections required for information 

regarding U.S. persons.

ic governance framework 

Fact shee

ODNI Office of civil liberties, privacy and t

ic governance framework 

Highligh

• Creates a set of rules to ensure that intelligence 

activities are conducted in a way that upholds 

intelligence agencies’ duties to the Constitution

• Rules regarding collection, retention, and dissemination of foregin intelligence are derived 

from statutes, EOs and PPDs

• All three branches of government – executive, 

judiciary and legislative – are involved in the 

oversight of intelligence activities
oversight

We have a complex system of “many layers with many 

players,” involving all three branches of government, 

to ensure that our intelligence agencies conduct their 

intelligence activities in a manner that complies with 

the laws and policies established by our democratic 

institutions. 

• Executive Branch – There are a range of organizations in the Executive Branch that carry out 

important advice and oversight functions to protect privacy and civil liberties. Departments and 

agencies have offices of general counsel to ensure 

that intelligence activities are conducted lawfully. 

In addition, offices of the inspector general independently carry out audit, investigation, and 

related functions to protect against fraud, waste 

and abuse. Agencies may also have internal compliance offices, intelligence oversight offices, and 

privacy and civil liberties offices. The Department 

of Justice also plays a key role in reviewing and 

approving intelligence agency procedures under 

EO 12333, and in providing oversight over how 

agencies implement FISA authorities. Additionally, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board 

(PCLOB), an independent agency within the 

executive branch, provides advice and oversight of 

the government’s counterterrorism activities of the 

government. 

• Congress – All of our activities are closely overseen by Congress. In particular, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) 

and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence 

(SSCI) are charged with intelligence oversight. 

Other congressional committees are also involved, 

such as the judiciary committees. Congressional 

oversight is granular, with Congress receiving a 

broad range of reports pertaining to intelligence 

activities, including specific reports relating to 

implementation of FISA authorities. Additionally, 

Congress frequently requests specific information 

pertaining to topics of interest by requesting particular reports, answers to written questions, and 

appearances at hearings by subject matter experts 

and top officials. 

• Judiciary – The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance 

Court strictly supervises the government’s activities concerning FISA. The Court conducts exacting reviews and has the ability to provide judicial 

oversight regardless of how “secret” the underlying 

activities may be. Many of the Court’s opinions 

have been publicly released. Additionally, with the 

June 2015 passage of the USA FREEDOM Act, the 

Court has now appointed the required panel of 

experts who can serve as amicus curiae (literally, 

“friend of the court”), should the Court confront 

significant or novel interpretations of law. The 

USA FREEDOM Act also requires the government to declassify or summarize to the public 

Court opinions that involve significant interpretations of law. 

2