On him. The joy and peace in that mass were a gift to many, who continue to respond to it. Since his death, i have learned so much about my fathers faith and how he lived it. That our understanding of him continue to grow in to death. That we have a new understanding of gods love. Some of my friends have expressed this beautifully in the jewish tradition. May his memory be a blessing. It is that and a source of grace and opportunity to grow in faith. I cannot think of any greater legacy. Thank you. [applause] thank you, everyone. [applause] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] democrats are holding caucuses in maine. Republicans have a primary in puerto rico. The results asou they become available. Yesterday, senator bernie kansas won caucuses in and nebraska, while clinton won the primary vote in louisiana. Donald trump won in louisiana and kentucky. Ted cruz took maine and kansas. Our road to the white house coverage continues today with jumper with Governor John Kasich live in columbus, ohio. Appearing with the governor will be former california governor Arnold Schwarzenegger at 2 30 p. M. Here on cspan. Teacher. The most important thing to me is education. I am looking out the candidates very closely for their programs in education. I am not happy in the last 15 years or so with the core standards and the common core that has been happening. So i am going to vote for either Bernie Sanders or hillary clinton. I am happy with those choices and am interested to see if their education plans would be implemented. Voting for ted cruz, because he is a constitutional scholar, eloquent, and principled, consistently, out of all of the candidates so far. Fbi director james comey testified tuesday at a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee on the bureaus efforts to access information while investigating potential crime. He answered questions about the fbis ability to investigate the contents of Smart Devices and how the needs of Law Enforcement are even evolving along with technology. This portion of the hearing is one hour and 45 minutes. Willgoodlatte we continue. And we recognize mr. J fits. Thank you for being here. My grandfather is a career fbi agent. The big question for our country is how many how much privacy are we going to give up in the name of security. As he said, there is no easy answer. But when historically, with all the resources and assets of the federal government, all the expertise, all the billions of dollars, when has it been a businessto force or private entity . The new york cases the seminal topic. Lets talk about what you can see and what you can do. With all due respect to the fbi, what apple had suggested they do in order to rich read the data, correct . When they went to change the password, that screwed things up, did it not . Dir. Comey i dont know that thats accurate, actually. I i wasnt there, dont have complete visibility, but i agreed with the questioner earlier. There was an issue created by an effort after the fbis effort to get in quickly. Rep. Chaffetz and and and if they didnt reset it, then they could have gone to a wifi local wifi a known wifi access and performed that backup so they could go to the cloud and look at the data, correct . Dir. Comey yes. You could go in the cloud through that mechanism, anything that was backuppable, to make up a word the cloud, but that that does not solve the problem. I would still be talking about it otherwise. Rep. Chaffetz but lets talk about what the government can see, on using a phone. And its not just an iphone, but you can look at metadata, correct . That is not encrypted, correct . Dir. Comey yes. Rep. Chaffetz if i called someone else or that phone had called other people, all of that information is available to the ei . Dir. Comey in most circumstances, right metadata rep. Chaffetz in this case lets talk about this case. You you want to talk about this case. Dir. Comey my understanding is you can see most of the metadata. Rep. Chaffetz how would you define metadata . Comey i was just going to say that. Metadata, as i understand it, is records of time of contact, numbers assigned to the caller or texture. But content. You cannot see what i said but you can see that i texted to you in erie. With texts in particular, thats tricky, particularly texting using imessage. Theres limitations to our ability to see the metadata around that. Again, i am not an expert. That is my understanding. Rep. Chaffetz and do you believe that geolocation, if youre tracking somebodys actual where they are, is that content, or is that metadata . Dir. Comey my understanding is it depends upon whether youre talking historical or realtime, when it comes to geolocation data. But it can very much implicate the warrant requirement and does in the fbi work a lot. Rep. Chaffetz so thats what were trying to what i whats whats frustrating to me, being on judiciary, being the chairman of the oversight committee, there is nobody on this panel in the representative of the people have been able to see what the guidance is an understanding how you interpret and what you are actually doing or what or not doing. Dir. Comey youve asked that of the fbi and not been able to get it . Rep. Chaffetz the department of justice today. We have been asking for this for years. Whats frustrating is the department of justice is asking for more cools, compulsion, and we cannot even see what you are already doing. We cant even see to the degree youre using stingrays and how they work. I mean, i think i understand how they work, but what sort of requirements are there . Articulable suspicion . A probable cause one being used or needed . And its not just the fbi. I mean, youve got the irs and Social Security and others using stingrays again, other tools that, i would argue, are to somebodysnt lives and not just the metadata you are able to see. So how do we get exposure . How do we how do we help you if we cant if you routinely refuse and i say you, meaning the department of in explainingess to us what tools you already have an what you can access . How do we solve that . Dir. Comey yeah, i dont i dont have a great answer, sitting here. Ill go find out whats been asked for and whats been given. I like the idea of giving as much transparency as possible. I think people find it reassuring. We always use search warrants. It should not be that hard to give you that information. Rep. Chaffetz what i worry about you may be responsible, but i dont know what the irs is doing with them, and i have a hard time figuring out when that is responsible. Last comment, mr. Chairman. To what degree are you able to access and get into either in this case or broadly are you able to search social media in general and are you using that as an effect of tool to investigate and combat what you need to do . Rep. Goodlatte the time of the gentleman has expired. The witness can answer the question. Dir. Comey social media is a feature of all of our lives, and so its a feature of a lot of our investigations. Sometimes, it gives us useful information, sometimes knots. It is hard to answer in the abstract. But it is a big part of our work. Rep. Goodlatte chair thanks the gentleman, and recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. Johnson, for five minutes. Rep. Johnson thank you, director comey. The framers of our constitution recognized a right to privacy that americans would enjoy. Fourth amendment pretty much implies that right to privacy, does it not . Dir. Comey im not a constitutional scholar. I think a scholar, if he were sitting here, might say its not the Fourth Amendment thats the source of the right to privacy, it is other amendments to the constitution. But thats a technical answer. The Fourth Amendment is critically important, because its a restriction on government power. You may not look at the peoples houses, their effects, without a warrant and independent judiciary. Rep. Johnson but it also grants, impliedly to the government, the Fourth Amendment, the authority to search and seize when when when the search or seizure is reasonable, is that correct . Dir. Comey again, to be technical, i think the answer is congress has given the government that authority through statute. The Fourth Amendment is a restriction on that authority. Rep. Johnson the Fourth Amendment says that the right of the people to be secure in their place in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrant shall be issued but on opel cause. What i am reading into the Fourth Amendment is that the people do have a right to privacy, a right to be secure in houses, papers, and effects. But i am also reading into what an implied responsibility of the government to, on occasion, search and seize. Would that be your reading of it also . Dir. Comey yes. Rep. Johnson and of course, upon probable cause. But there are some circumstances where, in the hot pursuit, or at the time of an arrest, there are some exceptions that have been carved out to where a warrant is not always required to search and seize, is that correct . Dir. Comey yes. You mentioned one the socalled exigent circumstances doctrine, where if youre in the middle of an emergency and youre looking for a gun that a bad guy may have hate in a car or something, you do not necessarily have to get the warrant. If you have the factual basis, you can do the search, and then have the judge look at it and validate it. Rep. Johnson now, even in a situation where exigent circumstances exist, technology has now brought us to the point where Law Enforcement or government is preempted from being able to search and seize, is that correct . The technology has produced this result . Dir. Comey yeah, i think technology has allowed us to create zones of complete privacy, which sounds like an awesome thing until you really think about it. But those zones prohibit any Government Action under the Fourth Amendment or under our search authority. Well, itsn actually a zone of impunity, would it not be . A zone where bad things can happen and the security of americans can be placed at risk. Dir. Comey potentially, yes, sir. Rep. Johnson and that is the situation that we have with endtoend encryption. Is that not correct . Dir. Comey i think thats a fair description where we have communications where, even with a judges order cant be intercepted. Rep. Johnson now, you said that you were not a constitutional scholar, and neither am i. But does it seem reasonable that our that the framers of the anytitution meant to exempt domain from its authority to be able to search and seize if it is based on probable cause or some exigent circumstance allows for a search and seizure with less than a warrant and a showing of probable cause . Dir. Comey i doubt that they obviously, i doubt that they imagined the devices we have today and the ways of communicating. But i also doubt that they imagined they would be anyplace in American Life where Law Enforcement, with lawful authority, could not go. And the reason i say that is the First Amendment talks about the peoples homes. Is there a more important place to any of us than our homes . From the founding of this country, it was contemplated that Law Enforcement could go in your house with the appropriate medication and oversight. So to me, the logic of that tells me they wouldnt have imagine any box or storage area or device that could never be entered. Rep. Johnson so from that standpoint, to be a strict constructionist about the constitution and the Fourth Amendment, its ridiculous that anyone would think that we would not be able to take our present circumstances and shape current nicetiespreciate the of todays practical realities i know i am rambling a bit, but did you understand what i just said . Dir. Comey i understand what you said, sir. Rep. Johnson would you agree or disagree with me . Rep. Goodlatte time for the gentleman has expired. The director may answer the question. Dir. Comey i think its the kind of question that democracies were built to wrestle with and that the congress of the United States is fully capable of wrestling with. Rep. Goodlatte the time for the gentleman has expired. The chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. Marino for five minutes. Rep. Marino thank you, chairman. Mr. Director, its always a pleasure. Im going to expand a little bit on one of judge poles questions. Is the bureau asking apple to simply turn over the penetration code order you want it at your disposal . Dir. Comey as i understand the judges order, the way it could work out here is that the maker of the phone would write the code, keep the phone and the code entirely in their office send, and the fbi would things electronically. So we would not have the phone or the code. Rep. Marino thats a good point to clarify. Because theres some been a lot of rumors out there. Im going to switch to the courts a little bit here. Do you see the federal court resolving the warrant issue the bureau is presently faced with. Decision comesat down. Or should Congress Legislate the issue now, if at all . Dir. Comey i dont i appreciate the question. I dont think thats for me to say. I do think the courts some people have said, so, in the middle of this terrorism investigation, why did you not come to congress . Because we are in the middle of a terrorism investigation. The courts could sort that out faster, but only in this case. I do not see how the courts can resolve this tension between privacy and Public Safety we are all feeling. Rep. Marino another good point. Given that most of the our social, professional, and very personal information is on our desktop computers, our laptops , on our pads, and now more than ever on these things, what is your position on notching up the level at which members of the federal judiciary can approve a warrant to access clear clear to access critically valuable evidence, particularly when fighting terrorism . Dir. Comey do you mean making the threshold something above probable cause . Rep. Marino no, not the threshold. The judicial the federal judicial individuals making this decision. Right now i understand, its a magistrate. When i was at the state level, we could do things at the magistrate level. But then we had to go to the superior court. And then working the federal to one or had to go two Different Levels. What is your position on that . Dir. Comey i see what youre saying. So instead of having the magistrate judges decide these questions, the District Court might . Rep. Marino yes, and no disrespect to magistrate courts, im very good friends with a lot of those brilliant people who will eventually, i know, go to the bench. But from the perspective of the public, a more narrowly defined limited number of people making that decision concerning the l tronics we have. Dir. Comey honestly, congressman, i havent thought about that. I agree with you, i have a number of friends who are magistrate judges and they are awesome and think well and will well. I think they are capable of handling these, but i have not thought about it further than that. Rep. Marino ok. And just for the record, ive managed a couple of prosecution offices, and ive never gone to the experts, whether its in dna or whether it is in these electronics and asked them did you complete everything did you think you should have completed . Rep. Goodlatte thank you, mr. Marino. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. Chu, for five minutes. Rep. Chu director comey, my district is next to San Bernardino. After the terror attack, we mourned the loss of 14 lives and empathized with the 22 wounded. And there is fear and anxiety constituents. So our discussion here is particularly important to the people back home. Area who many in our want answers. But there are also many who feel conflicted about putting their own privacy at risk. So, my first question to you is, under federal law, we do not require Technology Companies to maintain a key to unlock encrypted information in the devices they sell to customers. Some of the witnesses well hear from today argue that if such a key or software was developed to help the fbi access a device used by syed farook, it would make the millions of other devices in use today vulnerable. How can we ensure that were not creating legal or technical backdoors to u. S. Technology that will empower other foreign governments in taking advantage of this loophole . Dir. Comey thats a great question. I think what you have to do is just talk to people on all sides of it who are true experts, which i am not, but ive also talked to a lot of experts. I am an optimist. I do not think we have given this the shot it deserves. I do not think the most creative and innovative people in our country have had an incentive to solve this problem. But when i look at particular phones in the fall of 2014, the makers of these phones could open them and i dont remember people saying the world was ending at that point and that we are all exposed. I do think judgments have been made that are not irreversible. The best way about it is talk to people so why do you make the phone this way and what is the possibility . The world i imagine is a world where people comply with warrants. How they do it is up to them. Lots of phone makers and providers of email and text provide secure services and comply with warrants. Thats just the way theyve structured their business, and so it gives me a sense of optimism that this is not an impossible problem to solve. Really hard in it will involve you talking to the people who know this work. Rep. Chu well, id like to talk about Law Enforcement finding technical solutions. I understand there may be other methods or solutions for Law Enforcement when it comes to recovering data on a smart phone. Professor landau argues in her testimony later today that solutions to accessing the data already exist within the forensic analysis community, solutions whi