The problem has always been that while the FBI was gunning for Trump, their witnesses were not vetted because they believed their lies, or appeared to have believed. So, the FISA court doesn't really have a case for contempt. I could be wrong. Russia, Russia, Russia went on for years and was difficult to follow it at the time, much less now remember.
That said, I don't believe in a secretive un-Constitutional court like FISA. It was only time until their absolute power got corrupted by bad actors. It should be disbanded. Like I said, even the head judge stated frustration that the FBI didn't provide FISA with the facts for their initial warrants. Then the FBI continued to get same type snooping warrants with the same info, IIRC.
And while we're at disbanding FISA, get rid of the political DHS. Bad Bush mistake to push it, but everyone wanted something big done after 9/11.
No witnesses appeared before the court. The FBI agents who submitted the warrant applications vouched for the integrity of the information by submitting it. It is most certainly a felony to intentionally lie to a FedMob court, in spite of what Cbolt claims. (and, yes, I know you are a lawyer, Cbolt)
DHS was waiting for an excuse to happen. Hart-Rudmann Commission, aka U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century.
FISA came about in part in response to a case known as “the Keith Case.” The government has always snooped without warrants, and always will (snoop to the extent technology permits - judge made law will conform to this).
The “protections” in the bill of rights are mostly illusions. “None of them is absolute” is the starting point for erosion.