Get the NEW Torrent Search NOW!!



US Congress Approves Warrantless Wiretapping - 293 to 129

posted by DrewWilson in security // 153 days 9 hours 20 minutes ago

The fourth amendment to the US Constitution took a serious hit today. Congress has just approved warrantless wiretapping. The news is leaving many civil rights activists disappointed.



In a move that strangely resembles what happened in Sweden two days ago, in spite of fierce opposition, the US congress has approved immunity for Internet Service Providers and telecommunication companies who participated in the president backed warrantless wiretapping program in the United States. All of this was approved in spite of fierce opposition to telecom amnesty which is found in the current FISA legislation.

From a press release on the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF):

Privacy rights and the rule of law took a serious blow today when the House of Representatives passed blanket retroactive immunity for phone companies that participated in the president's warrantless surveillance program. The FISA Amendments Act, H.R. 6304, which House Leadership rushed to the floor today after its introduction yesterday, passed by a vote of 293 to 129. The Senate is expected to vote on the bill next week.

The bill was touted as a bipartisan "compromise" on the issues of electronic surveillance and immunity. But in fact it requires dismissal of lawsuits against companies like AT&T that participated in the program as long as the companies received a piece of paper from the government indicating that the surveillance had been authorized by the president and was determined to be lawful.

"Immunity for telecom giants that secretly assisted in the NSA's warrantless surveillance undermines the rule of law and the privacy of every American," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kevin Bankston. "Congress should let the courts do their job instead of helping the administration and the phone companies avoid accountability for a half decade of illegal domestic spying. If this legislation passes the Senate and is signed into law, the American people will have lost their last best chance to discover the true scope of the president's wiretapping program and to determine whether or not the law was broken."

"We are deeply disappointed that the House Leadership, which was so courageous in its previous opposition to telecom immunity, caved to the Administration's fear-mongering and put this seriously flawed legislation on the floor for a vote," said Bankston. "We look to leaders in the Senate who value the rule of law to stand up and strongly oppose this blanket immunity for telecom lawbreakers, and in particular urge Senator Barack Obama to lead his party in rejecting this false compromise."


EFF wasn't alone on this sentiment. Cory Doctorow, editor of one of the internets most popular blogs had comments of his own.

"Senate Democrats covered themselves in shame today," Doctorow writes, "joining with Republicans to pass a bill granting amnesty to the cowardly telephone companies who helped the President's office with its illegal bulk-wiretapping campaign that spied on every American call and email without any judicial oversight. What's more, the bill also allows this to continue going on in the future. Who needs the fourth amendment?"

The fourth amendment to the US constitution states:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Further reading: Wikipedia entry

It seems that this law still has to be approved by the Senate before it is signed by the president before it becomes law. The hope is that the senate will vote this down, though some may point out that the senate is run by the republicans, the party pushing for this legislation in the first place.

Update: ACLU has issued a press release on the matter. From the press release:

"It’s Christmas morning at the White House thanks to this vote. The House just wrapped up some expensive gifts for the administration and their buddies at the phone companies. Watching the House fall to scare tactics and political maneuvering is especially infuriating given the way it stood up to pressure from the president on this same issue just months ago. In March we thought the House leadership had finally grown a backbone by rejecting the Senate’s FISA bill. Now we know they will not stand up for the Constitution.

"No matter how often the opposition calls this bill a ‘compromise,’ it is not a meaningful compromise, except of our constitutional rights. The bill allows for mass, untargeted and unwarranted surveillance of all communications coming in to and out of the United States. The courts’ role is superficial at best, as the government can continue spying on our communications even after the FISA court has objected. Democratic leaders turned what should have been an easy FISA fix into the wholesale giveaway of our Fourth Amendment rights.

"More than two years after the president’s domestic spying was revealed in the pages of the New York Times, Congress’ fury and shock has dissipated to an obedient whimper. After scrambling for years to cover their tracks, the phone companies and the administration are almost there. This immunity provision will effectively destroy Americans’ chance to have their deserved day in court and will kill any possibility of learning the extent of the administration’s lawless actions. The House should be ashamed of itself. The fate of the Fourth Amendment is now in the Senate’s hands. We can only hope senators will show more courage than their colleagues in the House."


Update 2: The EFF has released an additional news update entitled "House Falls Down on the Job". From the posting:

While Speaker Pelosi and President Bush describe it as a "balanced bill" with "bipartisan support," the millions of Americans whose privacy rights have been violated by the President's illegal spying program seem to have been left out of the equation.

Senator Bond's gloating statement to the New York Times showed the true picture: "I think the White House got a better deal than even they had hoped to get." The Washington Post wrote that the bill "hands President Bush one of the last major legislative victories he is likely to achieve." And the San Francisco Chronicle, writing from Speaker Pelosi's home district, called the vote "weak, timid, spineless."

To say that EFF is disappointed in the House Leadership's support for this bill is an understatement. Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer, so vocal in their opposition to telecom immunity last March, capitulated to a dangerous "compromise" that gives the telecoms and the Bush Administration what they have been demanding for over a year: Protection from court cases that threaten to uncover the extent of the President's illegal spying program.

Many Democrats stood up for the rule of law, and they deserve our thanks. Senators Conyers and Nadler have been consistent and vocal in their staunch opposition to immunity. Senator Feingold has spoken out as well, saying that the bill "is not a compromise, it is a capitulation."


The EFF is urging everyone to contact their senator to oppose retroactive immunity.



  • #1    The land of the free..
    posted by freeloader105 153 days 7 hours 59 minutes ago
  • #2    home of the sheep.
    posted by deshman 153 days 7 hours 24 minutes ago
  • #3    May all these cowards and traitors burn in hell.
    posted by Gamer8585 153 days 7 hours 22 minutes ago
  • #4    Am I the only one who thought it was a good thing?

    It's only warrantless if you are talking to somebody OVERSEAS that is of interest to the feds.

    If you're talking to suspected terrorists we should be able to listen and not have to wait until the phone calls over and get a judge;s permission. A call that LEAVES the US is not protected by the 4th amendment, nor should it be.

    So the title is sort of misleading.

    Lastly, it was also good that telcos did get immunity, I mean it was right after 9/11 for heaven's sake and we had to get to the bottom of the WORST TERRORIST ATTACK IN OUR NATION'S HISTORY.

    If we allowed them t get sued then in the future if another situation of significant importance happens wont we be pissed if they refuse until the courts sort it out?
    posted by soulxtc 153 days 6 hours 22 minutes ago
  • #5    Sorry for disagreeing with you, but for one, the retroactive immunity actually affects domestic communications as well. Source: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/06/three-media-mistakes

    For another, the law is already designed in such a way to track such phone calls without a warrant in the first place. Source: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/mukaseys-missed-call
    posted by DrewWilson 153 days 6 hours 4 minutes ago
  • #6    Article updated again. :)
    posted by DrewWilson 153 days 5 hours 42 minutes ago
  • #7    OMGZ 911 ban freedom1!!
    posted by windoze9x 152 days 21 hours 5 minutes ago
  • #8    Well go hysteria!

    I'm kinda surprised Soul that you'd be spoutin' that nonsense, It's true that such an amendment has beneficial purposes, but at what cost, whenever you call someone, be it your grammy or your guerilla buddy off in Thailand somewheres, someone else is going to know -EVERYTHING- you say.

    For businesses this is the most frightening thing of all, because now you have insider information leaking out of an unpluggable hole because of mass paranoia, that can destroy companies and makes insider trading that much more possible and capable of being successful.

    For joe blows like you or me, it matter's squat, I don't communicate outside of my country, I doubt you do either, but it -DOES- encroach on your personal privacy without warrant.

    Innocent before proven guilty hmm? not so much so nowadays eh?
    posted by Mord_Sith 152 days 9 hours 58 minutes ago
  • #9    Yes, technically it's only for communications going over seas, but without much in the way of over sight and the president's get out of jail free powers it's going to be next to impossible to enforce. We can see what lack over sight does just look at the thousands of improperly issued National Security Letters by the FBI. If the president was willing to ignore the FISA in the first place to conduct illegal wiretapping, what's to stop him from continuing to do so? Not much. We had checks and balances for a reason, to protect people from abuse at the hands of the government.

    We get attacked and the response is to hell with the Constitution and the rule of law. Seeing how fast the Fourth Amendment is being eroded away, it makes one wonder how much longer the First etc will last. I wonders what's going to be left to defend when these "anti-terrorism" measures turn the U.S into a police state.
    posted by prh99 152 days 8 hours 9 minutes ago
  • #10    It is direct disregard to the right of every civilian in the United States.

    I wonder how much more people with take before joining the EFF and/ or writing their congressman?

    Looks like there are only four people here at ZP that... never mind.
    posted by HelenaP 152 days 8 hours 8 minutes ago
  • #11    Maybe now we can catch Osama bin Laden with the now legal wiretaps!
    posted by manakazero 152 days 2 hours 59 minutes ago
  • #12    the reason is Google police state and look it up on you tube http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=police+state&spell=1
    posted by broadbit 141 days 12 hours 38 minutes ago

Login to ZeroPaid.com
Username
Password

* Be sure that you have cookies enabled in your browser, without them you will not be able to login correctly.

Register here if you are not a member of Zeropaid.com.

members that voted for this story

    © 2000 - 2008 Zeropaid Inc, All rights reserved.
    Company Info | Contact Us | Zeropaid Crew | Advertise | Cheap Cars
    Hosting Provided by:
    San Diego Colocation - Complex Drive