How does the board get around the fact that the statute was reauthorized by Congress twice after the metadata program began? The story hints at the PCLOB’s view:
Defenders of the program have argued that Congress acquiesced to that secret interpretation of the law by twice extending its expiration without changes. But the report rejects that idea as “both unsupported by legal precedent and unacceptable as a matter of democratic accountability.”
I find it hard to believe that this position withstands analysis but I’ll wait to see the full report.