Legal News

Is the Trial Bar the Dems? Anti-Wiretap Weapon?

By Dan Slater

Last Tuesday, we reported here on the Senate’s vote to reauthorize a law giving government greater powers to eavesdrop in terrorism cases and approving immunity for telecoms that cooperate in spying. Two days later we wrote about a backlash against the the bill by those who argue telecoms don’t need assurances that they won’t be prosecuted for handing over information because they’re savvy when it comes to complying with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act themselves.

Then, at the close of Thursday, it all came to a head when Speaker Nancy Pelosi (pictured) adjourned the House without scheduling a vote on the wiretapping bill. Congressional Republicans resisted a temporary extension of the bill, which then expired on Saturday. The main sticking point, reported the NYT, was a provision in the bill providing legal immunity for telecoms that, at the Bush administration’s request, cooperated in providing data following 9/11.

Today, a WSJ editorial takes aim at Pelosi and her compadres, arguing that the assistance of the private sector — i.e. telecoms — is essential for intelligence gathering in the post-Cold War era, and that the expiration of the wiretap law “will do significant security harm” because telecoms will no longer voluntarily cooperate without a guarantee of immunity.

Why won’t they cooperate? The threat of lawsuits, writes the WSJ. “What we have here is a remarkable display of the anti-antiterror minority at work. Democrats could vote directly to restrict wiretapping by the executive branch, but they lack the votes. So instead they’re trying to do it through the backdoor by unleashing the trial bar to punish the telephone companies. Then if there is another terror attack, they’ll blame the phone companies for not cooperating.”

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on February 19, 2008 (boomark / email).