Congress to revisit expanded spy law next week

Congressional Democrats don't plan to waste much time in revisiting a temporary expansion of federal eavesdropping law that has met with hostility in privacy and civil liberties circles.

The U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee on Wednesday afternoon said it plans to hold a hearing on September 5--that is, the day after politicians return from their August recess--to begin exploring, well, changes to the changes to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, better known as FISA.

According to committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.), the move is in part a response to misgivings by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She has said the last-minute changes approved by Congress earlier this month in response to Bush administration pressure are "unacceptable" and warrant near-immediate "corrective action."

Meanwhile, the president and his intelligence advisers are angling for further changes--including immunity for telephone companies that have complied with government surveillance requests--to the so-called Protect America Act, which is currently scheduled to expire six months after it was made law.

There was no immediate word on what the Senate plans to do on its end. A witness list for the House event has not been finalized yet, a committee spokeswoman said.

[Possibill]

Is everyone afraid to respond because...

they don't want to get put on the eavesdropping list...

[BoulderSue]

Evesdropping/PAA

If you are afraid you are going to be put on the list it must mean you're doing something bad, according to some friends of mine, and probably plenty of others,including members of Congress. That is one ****-poor reaction! Members of Congress have been stopped by airport security, for heaven's sake! At this point I think it would be a badge of honor to be on any of Mr. Bush's lists. Remember Nixon's enemies list? I seem to recall some very good people being proud of being on it and others disappointed when they found out they were not.

[majarosh]

Humorous or hubris?

Possibill,
I'm not sure if your being humorous (if so, good on ya', Mate) or illeberal.
The only way someone who responds can "get put on the eavesdropping list" is if they are a person "reasonably believed to be located outside the United States" and meet the conditions set out previously in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.

Knowing what the ammendment actuall says would be helpful to the discussion.
If you were actually trying to make a "funny", OK! We sure could use a few laughs.

[majarosh]

Does accuracy matter?

Anne wrote:
"Meanwhile, the president and his intelligence advisers are angling for further changes--including immunity for telephone companies that have complied with government surveillance requests--to the so-called Protect America Act, which is currently scheduled to expire six months after it was made law."

The immunity is already included in the ammendment, which BTW, the official short title is "Protect America Act-2007".



`"(l) Notwithstanding any other law, no cause of action shall lie in any court against any person for providing any information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with a directive under this section."

[AnneBroache]

Immunity

The general understanding is that the provision of the law you quoted immunizes companies going forward, but not in cases that arose before the law was passed. There's more on that in the FAQ we published a few weeks ago:
http://news.com.com/FAQ+How+far+does+the+new+wiretap+law+go/2100-1029_3-6201032.html
CNET moderator icon |