From New York Public Radio, this is the podcast of On the Media.

On The Media is produced by WNYC and heard across America on NPR stations.

Visit On TheMedia.org to find your local public radio station.

This podcast is made possible by WNYC and its listeners.

Please help support this free service by becoming a member at WNYC.org.

From WNYC in New York, this is NPR's On the Media. I'm Bob Garfield.

And I'm Brooke Gladstone. Last week, the New York Times reported that soon after September 11th,

the National Security Agency began eavesdropping on American citizens.

Under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA,

the government can legally conduct such operations as long as it obtains a warrant from the FISA court.

But the NSA never sought those warrants, as the Times disclosed after holding its story for more than a year.

We'll discuss why the Times took so long in a few moments, but first, some background.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was enacted in 1978 to prevent the kinds of surveillance abuses common during the civil rights era and the Vietnam War.

Since then, the FISA Court has rarely denied a requested warrant.

The big unanswered question, why the government didn't ask for any in this case.

Here with some possible answers is William Arkin, author of the Washington Post blog Early Warning,

which often addresses military and security issues,

he says the administration had two reasons for sidestepping the FISA court.

The first is a justification on the part of the administration that the timeframe for seeking a FISA warrant was too long,

and thereby they needed to move quickly. The second is that

there are some technological changes which have occurred. Realities associated with modern

surveillance of potential terrorists which necessitate the government not seek the permission

...