Promoting and protecting nonprofit advocacy for a stronger democracy

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Bush Says Congress Must Include Telecom Immunity

In attempting to pass legislation that would update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), President Bush is calling on Congress to pass a bill with language providing retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that helped the government with warrantless surveillance. Bush accused some in Congress of "blocking efforts to provide meaningful liability protection to those companies now facing multi-billion dollar lawsuits only because they are believed to have assisted in efforts to defend our nation following the September the 11th attacks." While major differences remain between Senators, the Senate may take up the legislation this week, and at least two Democrats, Senators Chris Dodd and Russell Feingold, are promising to put up procedural roadblocks.

The most contentious issue during floor debate is bound to be the issue regarding the telecommunications companies. A bill (S. 2248) approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee would provide immunity for surveillance activities, but when the Judiciary Committee considered the same bill, they voted to send a substitute to the floor that did not address the issue.

Feingold will most likely object to giving unanimous consent to allow the Senate to take up the Intelligence bill, forcing a floor vote in order to proceed. Feingold could also offer an amendment that requires the administration to get approval from the secret FISA court before any spying could begin.

BNA Money and Politics ($$) reports that Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) "has proposed a compromise that would allow the U.S. government to take the place of electronic communication service providers with respect to lawsuits related to the warrantless surveillance program. Specter says that cases challenging the program should be allowed to go forward, even though he questions whether they will succeed." However, if the companies were replaced with the government as the defendants, it is questionable that the government would simply invoke state secrets during the court proceedings.