FISA's unanswered questions
Posted: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 3:01 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under:
Congress
From NBC's Ken Strickland
As heated debate over wiretapping finally draws to a close with the expected final passage in the Senate this afternoon, significant questions remain unanswered to the dismay of liberal Democrats:
When the administration bypassed the court system shortly after 9/11 and asked phones companies to wiretap calls moving through the United States, was it legal? Was it constitutional? This was the issue when government's activities were first revealed in the New York Times in December 2005.
The passage of today's bill forfeits the courts' ability to make that legal determination. By essentially granting phone companies retroactive immunity for pending lawsuits -- lawsuits alleging the wiretaps were illegal -- the courts have been pushed to the sidelines, say the bills opponents.
Fearing bankruptcy from lawsuits, the telecoms sought immunity for any current or past actions. Without it, they said, they'd be reluctant to cooperate with future wiretapping requests which would potentially leave gaps in the surveillance. Or worse, Republicans warned, the telecoms might shut down the wiretaps. There was also an unknown amount of surveillance certifications were set to expire in August.
The new law will update dramatically the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. It beefs up the government's ability to monitor suspected terrorist. It allows the FISA court more supervision over procedures. It also goes further than the previous law to protect Americans from wiretaps without a warrant. And it requires agencies inspectors general to investigate 9/11 wiretaps.
In the simplest terms, the bill looks forward, not backwards.
