--- title: Nunes Memo Attacks Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court description: Of all those with a stake in the memo, one of the most important has gone overlooked: the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. canonical: https://time.com/5135266/nunes-memo-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-court/ author: TIME article:opinion: true article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2018-02-06T15:25:41.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-02-23T19:09:56.934Z article:section: Ideas og:title: The Nunes Memo Attacks the Legitimacy of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court og:description: The FISC should act to repair the damage og:url: https://time.com/5135266/nunes-memo-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-court/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt6bf361bc7a4ef26d/6988fa5e0a4a2238df9d19cb/nunes.jpeg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 2405 og:image:height: 1353 og:image:alt: Rep. Devin Nunes og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: The Nunes Memo Attacks the Legitimacy of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court twitter:description: The FISC should act to repair the damage twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt6bf361bc7a4ef26d/6988fa5e0a4a2238df9d19cb/nunes.jpeg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # The Nunes Memo Attacks the Legitimacy of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. It Should Act to Repair the Damage > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: August 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=14a22b54-5589-4d83-9276-b55f64d92ca8&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | Subscribers | Open rate | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | 540,000 | 45.6% | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | 430,000 | 50.7% | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Daily | 240,000 | 54.1% | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Tuesday and Saturday (2x per week) | 40,000 | 31.7% | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Monday to Saturday (3x per week) | 85,000 | 37.0% | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | 40,000 | 34.2% | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | 25,000 | 28.6% | Source: TIME, August 2026. Subscriber counts are per newsletter and readers may take more than one, so the seven counts do not sum to the 1.1 million+ unique newsletter audience. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Highest open rate | 54.1%, Health Matters | TIME, August 2026 | | Largest list | 540,000, The Brief | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=14a22b54-5589-4d83-9276-b55f64d92ca8&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=14a22b54-5589-4d83-9276-b55f64d92ca8&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (daily health), Worth Your Time (culture, twice weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, three times a week), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement. by [Daniel S. Alter](https://time.com/author/daniel-s-alter/) ## Daniel S. Alter Feb 6, 2018 3:25 PM UTC  Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., leaves the House Republican Conference meeting in the Capitol on Dec. 5, 2017. Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., leaves the House Republican Conference meeting in the Capitol on Dec. 5, 2017. Bill Clark—CQ-Roll Call,Inc./Getty Images by [Daniel S. Alter](https://time.com/author/daniel-s-alter/) ## Daniel S. Alter Feb 6, 2018 3:25 PM UTC Of all those with a [stake](http://time.com/5131993/donald-trump-nunes-memo-vindicates/) in the release of the so-called [Nunes memo](http://time.com/5130424/nunes-memo-doesnt-matter-donald-trump-investigation/), one of the most important has gone largely overlooked: the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court itself. The FISA Court is a special, powerful tribunal of federal district judges, appointed by the Chief Justice of the United States. It is authorized by Congress to allow federal law enforcement officials to surveil U.S. citizens suspected of spying for, or otherwise assisting, hostile foreign powers. Because of the obvious sensitivity of its operations, the FISA Court largely conducts its proceedings in secret and relies solely on the government’s evidence as justification for invading the privacy of Americans. The Nunes memo [questions](http://time.com/5130772/nunes-memo-released-what-it-says/) “the legitimacy and legality of certain \[Department of Justice\] and FBI interactions” with the FISA Court and alleges “a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to safeguard the American people from abuses related to the FISA process.” In doing so, the Nunes Memo has directly attacked the legitimacy of the court. The FISA Court has an institutional duty to protect the credibility of its decisions. It should publicly direct the Department of Justice to respond _in court_ to the Nunes Memo: the American people need an independent and unbiased evaluation of the memo’s claims. The [rebuttal](http://time.com/5133828/democratic-memo-nunes-gop-russia-congress/) of the Nunes Memo prepared by the minority members on the House Intelligence Committee cannot divest itself of political associations, and only the FISA Court can order the government to take corrective measures, should any be necessary. In order to vindicate its own utility and purpose, the court needs to collect and review all pertinent facts, and then either publicly refute or validate the Committee’s allegations. Some may question whether the FISA Court has the authority to enter the fray. It undoubtedly does. [The Supreme Court has long recognized](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/322/238/case.html) that the “public welfare demands that agencies of public justice be not so impotent that they must always be mute and helpless victims of deception and fraud.” Our constitutional tradition fully appreciates that “tampering with the administration of justice . . . is a wrong against the institutions set up to protect and safeguard the public, institutions in which fraud cannot complacently be tolerated consistently with the good order of society.” Accordingly, the “inherent power of a federal court to investigate whether a judgment was obtained by fraud is beyond question.” And the statute creating the FISA Court even provides a mechanism for addressing the memo’s charges. The law empowers the FISA Court, “_on its own initiative_” to “hold a hearing or rehearing . . . upon a determination that . . . the proceeding involves a question of exceptional importance.” The Nunes Memo surely [raises](http://time.com/5131289/white-house-statement-memo-donald-trump/) “a question of exceptional importance.” It is not every day that the majority members of the House Intelligence Committee accuse DOJ and FBI officials of a political conspiracy against the President of the United States — a conspiracy involving a covert plan to surveil the electronic communications of a U.S. citizen for purely political motives. Nor is it common practice for the President of the United States to [declassify](http://time.com/5130774/donald-trump-declassifies-nunes-memo/) such potentially destabilizing allegations for public consumption over the open and vigorous [objections](http://time.com/5127312/nunes-memo-release-fbi-concerns/) of top intelligence and law enforcement agents. The unavoidable disruption that these actions have jointly unleashed upon the U.S. intelligence and law enforcement communities, and the relationship of those institutions with the FISA Court, not to mention the public, are matters of “exceptional importance.” Whether the FISA Court has the authority to initiate its own investigative proceedings, though, is a distinct question from whether it should. Some might argue that it would be inappropriate for the court to inject itself into a political dispute that has engulfed the country. They would say that courts must steer clear of partisan struggles or risk losing their powerful moral authority that derives from political independence. But under these circumstances, they would be mistaken. The fundamental question raised by the Nunes Memo is not political; it is _factual_. Did DOJ and FBI officials mislead the FISA Court by withholding material information that would likely have affected the surveillance authorization for [Carter Page](http://time.com/5128614/carter-page-gop-memo-fisa-warrant/)? The answer to this question lies within the factual record that the FISA Court has either: (1) already gathered; or (2) can readily obtain through standard judicial inquiry. Courts are in the business of making such factual determinations: it’s their bread and butter. And we stake our entire judicial system on the assumption that federal judges do not exercise political bias when they adjudicate facts. Stated differently, the apprehension that factual findings may have political consequences should not be a judicial concern. Arguing for the adoption of the Federal Constitution, [Alexander Hamilton famously described the judiciary](http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th%5Fcentury/fed78.asp) as the “least dangerous” branch of the federal government. Because they have “no influence over the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of society; and can take no active resolution whatever,” Hamilton concluded that the federal courts “have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment.” In retrospect, perhaps Hamilton was a bit coy. But throughout American history, the solid and independent judgment of the federal courts has repeatedly cooled the heat of partisan conflict. We could certainly use some good judgment now. ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"OpinionNewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/5135266/nunes-memo-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-court/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/5135266/nunes-memo-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-court/"},"headline":"The Nunes Memo Attacks the Legitimacy of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. It Should Act to Repair the Damage","datePublished":"2018-02-06T15:25:41.000Z","dateModified":"2026-02-23T19:09:56.934Z","description":"The stakes for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court have been overlooked","url":"https://time.com/5135266/nunes-memo-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-court/","keywords":["Courts","politics","Surveillance","fisa","justice","onetime"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt6bf361bc7a4ef26d/6988fa5e0a4a2238df9d19cb/nunes.jpeg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Daniel S. Alter","jobTitle":null,"url":"https://time.com/author/daniel-s-alter/"}],"articleSection":"Ideas","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt6bf361bc7a4ef26d/6988fa5e0a4a2238df9d19cb/nunes.jpeg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"Rep. Devin Nunes","caption":"Rep. Devin Nunes","creditText":"Bill Clark—CQ-Roll Call,Inc./Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/ideas/","name":"Ideas"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/courts/","name":"Courts"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/5135266/nunes-memo-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-court/","name":"The Nunes Memo Attacks the Legitimacy of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. It Should Act to Repair the Damage"}}]}] ```