So I just got this email from a friend of mine asking me to email my senators etc... about this amendment that is up for vote in the Senate (apparently it has passed the house).
Can someone explain what the FISA Amendments Act is?
Apparently there are three potential amendments to the bill that are up for consideration in the senate tomorrow...
from the information he supplied me I get:
the 3 amendmentshttp://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/06/bingaman-amendment
The current version of the Senate bill calls for an investigation into the President's warrantless wiretapping program by the Inspectors General of the Department of Justice and other US government intelligence agencies. The IG investigation, while no substitute for an independent court ruling, is likely to uncover some of the details of the program that the White House has been trying to suppress.
Unfortunately, the current bill puts the cart before the horse, by granting immunity from the law to phone companies before the investigation has even begun. If the Senate is resolved to pass legislation granting immunity, it it ought to at least know what conduct it's immunizing — It should give itself an opportunity to revisit the issue after it has the IG Report in hand.
My friend then said:One amendment, from Senators Dodd and Leahy, would strip immunity from the bill altogether.
A second, from Senator Specter [PDF], would would allow the court to deny immunity if it found that the government's surveillance activities were unconstitutional.
The Bingaman amendment would prevent Congress from granting immunity in the dark, as described in the press yesterday, by "stay[ing] pending cases against the telecoms and delay[ing] the effective date of any immunity provisions until 90 days after Congress received a report from the inspectors general of the intelligence agencies on the warrantless surveillance program". By placing a temporary hold on immunity and on the litigation until 90 days after the IG Report is submitted to Congress, the simple amendment would give Congress and the American people an opportunity to revisit the issue of telco immunity next year, in light of the audit's findings.
So I guess I'm asking is all of this correct? I am not up to date on the current spying laws and what not. Obviously this website has its biases etc...If you still aren't conviced, remember:
They can still spy for good reasons, they just have to have a warrant.
If they need to spy without a warrant, the current law allows them to in emergency situations, they just have to get the warrant later.
"Those who can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
–Benjamin Franklin
And then I guess I'm asking what do you think: Should they get immunity? If they do get it will we find out what information they provided? If they get immunity what are the chances they'd do it again?