New "JUSTICE" Act Could Roll Back Telecom Immunity 263
Asmodae writes to tell us about a bill proposed in Congress that could roll back telecom retroactive immunity along with adding other privacy safeguards. The "Judicious Use of Surveillance Tools in Counter-Terrorism Efforts" (JUSTICE) Act advocates the "least intrusive means" of information collection and imposes many limitations on the process. "One of the most significant aspects of the JUSTICE Act is that it will remove the retroactive immunity grants that were given to the telecom companies that participated in the NSA warrantless surveillance program. The companies that cooperated with the surveillance program likely violated several laws, including section 222 of the Communications Act, which prohibits disclosure of network customer information. The immunity grants have prevented the telecommunications companies that voluntarily participated in this program from being held accountable in court."
is it constitunitional? (Score:5, Interesting)
hate to suggest it, but aren't retroactive laws mostly unconstitutional? I realize this is simply putting the punishments back into place that were in place when the acts were committed. They can remove the immunity that was inacted to block the EFF's civil lawsuits, but thinking they could be held criminally liable again my just be wishful thinking.
Oh, come on (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:is it constitunitional? (Score:2, Interesting)
If the TELCOs broke the law by willingly participating in the warrentless wiretapping, then there is NOTHING retroactive about this. What IS unconstitutional is that there was an act passed by congress saying that the TELCOs cannot be punished.
One thing I don't like about this JUSTICE Act is that, if it passes, it gives congress the idea that the prior retroactive immunity act was constitutional.
Re:ooh (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:ooh (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, you had it right the first time. You see, as pointed out above, this isn't really JUSTICE in any sense: the telecoms were doing what they're gov't asked them in a time of fear and urgency, and the telecoms said "well, we have two choices:"
1) "Not only is this illegal, but its also wrong to invade privacy like that. No." Government definitely doesn't listen and/or just ignores what the telecoms want from the FCC later down the road. Public gets mad when government is all like "Hey, we asked for help against these terrorists but [BIG TELCO] said 'No.'" Telcos are bad guys.
2) "Well, its wrong, but you're the government, and I'm scared. Yes." Government gets information, wiretapping becomes public knowledge, public gets upset and government introduces bills to take the blame from them and put it on the telcos. Telcos are bad guys.
No matter what, they didn't have a chance. Risk being unpatriotic now or risk being unpatriotic later, either way the government was right and the telcos were wrong, because thats the law. Sounds like sweet, sweet JUSTICE to me.
Re:Cue the flying monkey right in... (Score:5, Interesting)
Save your breath, this is all about charging windmills and being too ignorant to understand they are being manipulated and told to look in the other direction while something serious goes on. The weak will follow the lead who can play them the easiest. For some, it's the tele-evangelist saying give me money or god will kill my dog (or was it him), for others, it's politicians acting like they are squeaky clean by playing on the emotions of others to hide their own dirty work.
Here is the thing, the Telecoms already have immunity under existing laws if the administration presented them with acceptable documentation claiming to of had the authority to gather the information. Now, contrary to what anyone might think, Bush isn't dumb, I mean he got elected twice and convinced congress to almost unanimously take us into two wars as well as not pull us out by ending the funding. Some will claim that it was the people pulling Bush's strings that did that and even if it's true, there is nothing to make anyone believe that they magically stopped with the NSA TSP. So what I'm getting at is, it's highly likely that the telecoms were presented with authentic enough documentation that they will slide out from under any liability for breaking any laws. That always was the law ever since 1968 when the first wire tap laws were made. The problem the telecoms had was that the administration was claiming national security secrete making it a felony to present the documentation that would serve as their complete defense.
What this was originally about is sueing the telecoms to get information on who was being watched by the government so as they could either sue the government (and be rich bitch), sue the telecoms who couldn't answer with their affirmative defense without ricking prison time, (rich again bitch) or inform certain people of those actions the government was taking against them. This bill being considered does nothing but allow that to happen but the judicial system isn't really that stupid. Most likely, Obama would allow (either by court case or congress acting on his behalf) certain judges, most likely FISA judges to view the documentation the government presented the telecoms and affirm if it was official enough to satisfy the law for the complete defense. This means that the telecoms will still end up with immunity and the information will still remain secrete. Meanwhile, something more sinister and serious will be going on because Bashing Bush is just as important as Brittany Spears losing 5 lbs by taking ex-lax or what ever she has done lately that's more important then anything else.
It's just something to keep the idiots occupied. Bread and circuses so to speak.
Re:Cue the flying monkey right in... (Score:5, Interesting)
The bottom line really would be that the $25 fee would only apply to those who buy services from these folks. As Qwest did not comply guess who lots of folks would be buying T1s from?
The entire point of fining a business is too encourage people not too do business with them by increasing their costs. The people who benefit from that are their competitors who obeyed the law.
Re:Cue the flying monkey right in... (Score:4, Interesting)
Four words: piercing the corporate veil. Once the company is opened up to civil liability, lawsuits will be filed, and during discovery, those lawsuits will likely uncover information about who knew what and when. At that point, depending on what they turn up, criminal charges might be filed against some of them.
Re:Cue the flying monkey right in... (Score:5, Interesting)
The United States is supposedly a nation ruled by law. In a nation ruled by law, not even the government has the right to order you to break the law, and in such a nation, the government cannot possibly make a meaningful commitment to protect you as part of the bargain.
In short, the Telecoms and the CIA shouldn't have broken the law, not even for the President (who is not above the law either), and in doing so, no matter how strident the declarations of immunity, they put their necks out. If a future administration decides, for good or ill, to rescind any guarantees, you're are, as they say, up shit creek.
Re:Cue the flying monkey right in... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Cue the flying monkey right in... (Score:3, Interesting)
And guess which ruling cabal just lost one election they didn't plan to lose.
Are you sure they didn't plan to lose? Look at the candidates they ran. One could sure make an argument that somebody deliberately threw the game, if only so they could have someone else to blame for the train wreck resulting from 8 years of blinkered government-by-gut-instinct.