Somewhere in cloak and dagger land,
President Cheney, er ah Bush insists that Telcos who received letters from the executive branch not the attorney general, as described in FISA law, ought to be legally inoculated and immune for 'aiding and abetting' executive branch abuses.
Telcos's know FISA, they understand the law and have hordes of lawyers, who can determine what is legal and what isn't. yet, some of them, not Quest, proceeded to violate FISA anyway. now...
Feinstein, (non lawyer) argues that we should give them a pass card, because they didn't follow the law, and meant well.
No FeinStein, your amendment is the proverbial, open barn door.
Why do you favor and defend corporations instead of the constitution you are sworn to uphold, and America's constituents you claim to represent.
On your amendment, explain please, how does retroactive immunity permit legal forensics in determining exactly who violated the law and who didn't, when, where and why, from the VP, the President, Addington, Yoo, AG, all the way down, including members of congress.
the answer is your Amendment submerges any future legal action; perhaps that's why so many congress people are eager to promote and pass FISA with immunity provision. they can remain pleasantly unaccountable to America.
FISA worked before this president, twisted the rules and ignored procedure. A reversion to the prior FISA law, might be just what the horses ordered......
Dear Mr. BlogNRound
Thank you for writing regarding the Bush Administration's request for legislation that would provide immunity for telecommunications companies that are alleged to have provided assistance to the National Security Agency after September 11, 2001. I appreciate your thoughts on this topic, and welcome the opportunity to respond.
The legislation to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) was debated in the Senate on December 17, 2007, but further action is postponed until January. That legislation, which was written by the Senate Intelligence Committee and approved by a vote of 13-2, would provide immunity for such companies if they were specifically requested or directed to provide assistance to the government.
The Intelligence Committee's report on the bill includes declassified text stating that the Executive branch provided letters to electronic communication service providers at regular intervals. These letters all directed or requested assistance and noted that the assistance was authorized by the President and was legal. The Committee's report can be found at http://intelligence.senate.gov/071025/report.pdf.
I introduced an amendment on the Senate floor that would limit this grant of immunity. Under my amendment, cases against the telecommunications companies would go to the FISA Court for judicial review. The Court would only provide immunity if it finds that the alleged assistance was not provided, that assistance met legal requirements, or that a company had a good faith, reasonable belief that assistance was legal.
I believe that this approach strikes the correct balance: it maintains court review and a judicial determination of whether companies provided assistance that they should have known violated the law.
I have also filed an amendment to restore FISA's exclusivity, to ensure that no surveillance program can proceed outside the law in the way that the Terrorist Surveillance Program did for more than five years.
Rest assured that I will make every effort to ensure that new FISA legislation will protect the privacy rights of all Americans without restricting the intelligence community's ability to protect us from attack.
Again, thank you for writing. I hope that you will continue to write on matters of importance to you. Best regards.
Sincerely yours,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator
