Telecoms get immunity from warrantless wiretaps

Parent companies of the nation’s three largest wireless providers can breathe a giant sigh of relief, with President Bush set to sign new electronic surveillance legislation that can free them from dozens of privacy lawsuits. The loud grumbling in the background is from lawmakers and privacy advocates that opposed allowing telecom giants to get off the hook.
Revisions to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, passed by the Senate yesterday and the House last month, effectively grants retroactive immunity to AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and Sprint Nextel Corp. in connection with their participation in the National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretap program. The spying initiative began shortly after the Sept.11, 2001, terrorist attacks and was kept secret until The New York Times revealed its existence in late 2005.
“This bill will help our intelligence professionals learn who the terrorists are talking to, what they’re saying, and what they’re planning,” said Bush, who had threatened to veto any FISA bill lacking telecom amnesty.
“It will ensure that those companies whose assistance is necessary to protect the country will, themselves, be protected from lawsuits for past or future cooperation with the government. It will uphold our most solemn obligation as officials of the federal government to protect the American people.”
The NSA warrantless wiretap controversy created friction between top Democrats on the House Commerce Committee and Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin, who cited national security grounds for refusing requests to investigate whether telecom carriers violated consumer privacy laws.
Before they’re completely free and clear, telecom companies that cooperated with the NSA warrantless wiretapping must prove to a federal court that they provided assistance because the government assured them it was legal and necessary.
“Far too often, national security issues have been sidelined or delayed because of accusations and attempts to score political points. That’s what makes [Wednesday] so remarkable. Both sides have come together for the sake of national security and passed a bill that will modernize the nation’s surveillance laws so that they are effective and relevant in the 21st Century,” said Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), chairman of the intelligence committee and a strong advocate for including telecom immunity in the FISA rewrite.
Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) led an unsuccessful campaign to strip telecom immunity from the FISA overhaul.
“If Congress short-circuits these lawsuits, we will have lost a prime opportunity to finally achieve accountability for these years of law-breaking. That’s why the administration has been fighting so hard for this immunity,” said Feingold during Senate debate. He added: “These lawsuits may be the last chance to obtain a judicial ruling on the lawfulness of the warrantless wiretapping program. It’s bad enough that Congress abdicated its responsibility to hold the president accountable for breaking the law. Now it is trying to absolve those who allegedly participated in his lawlessness.”
One privacy group said the battle will continue.
“We thank those senators who courageously opposed telecom immunity and vow to them, and to the American people, that the fight for accountability over the president’s illegal surveillance is not over,” said Kurt Opsahl senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “Even though Congress has failed to protect the privacy of Americans and uphold the rule of law, we will not abandon our defense of liberty. We will fight this unconstitutional grant of immunity in the courtroom and in the Congress, requesting repeal of the immunity in the next session, while seeking justice from the judiciary. Nor can the lawless officials who approved this massive violation of Americans’ rights rest easy, for we will file a new suit against the government and challenge warrantless wiretapping, past, present and future.”
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, failed in his pursuit of a compromise plan.
“I voted for the FISA bill because of the continuing threat of terrorism, even though my amendments to further protect constitutional rights were defeated,” Specter stated. “We could have both retained the surveillance program and protected the telephone companies by substituting the government as the defendant and it would have been preferable to allow the federal court to determine the constitutionality of the program in the pending cases. Faced with two unsatisfactory options, I chose to give law enforcement the extra power to fight terrorism even though I would have preferred a different balance on protecting constitutional rights.”
The two presidential contenders, Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), voted for the bill. Obama previously promised to filibuster any FISA bill with a telecom immunity provision.