ACLU CONFIRMS-SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE PASSED FISA BILL--WITHOUT--TELECOM IMMUNITY!!!

ACLU reporting it’s true:

Washington, DC – The ACLU is delighted that the Senate Judiciary Committee just passed a FISA bill without letting the telephone companies off the hook, although the rest of the bill does not pass constitutional muster.

Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington Legislative Office of the ACLU said, “We appreciate the work of Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI) to protect the civil liberties of all Americans. We still have reservations with both the House and Senate bills, and will continue to work to improve the legislation. It is heartening to know that people who feel their privacy was violated by the phone companies and by their own government are one step closer to having their day in court.

The ACLU is asking Senators to build in more civil liberties and privacy protections when the bill is considered by the whole Senate and to keep telecom immunity out of the final bill. We look to the leadership of Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) who has pledged a filibuster of any bill with telecom immunity in it.

The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to pass the RESTORE Act later this evening. Fredrickson said, “Representative Rush Holt (D-NJ) and the Progressive Caucus deserve credit for fighting for important improvements in the bill.”

The ACLU will fight in the coming months to keep immunity for telecommunications companies out of the final bill. Fredrickson said, “Americans whose privacy was violated deserve their day in court against the telephone companies.”

................................



No Immunity? FISA Bill Reported Out Of SJC

By: Christy Hardin Smith UPDATE: There are reports that immunity was stripped out altogether by this vote. Which, if true, is a big victory. That would mean that if the committee sent this out without immunity, the only way it would be in the final bill is if it were added back in via an amendment from the floor. If true, that is huge.

________________________

Here’s what I know thus far this evening:

– The Feingold amendment stripping immunity out of the FISA bill was defeated in an 11-8 vote (UPDATE: or possibly a 12-7 vote — conflicting reports on this.). Democrats voting against it were: Feinstein, Whitehouse and Kohl. (No idea as yet on which Republican voted for it, but I’m working on it.)

– The bill was reported out of the SJC for Title I only — nothing on Title II/Immunity was reported out. The final motion to report the bill out of committee without the immunity provisions passed with ten votes.

– The Specter “compromise” (read: WH CYA) was never voted on today.

......................

While we’re at it, Sen. Dodd has asked for a hold on this bill. Please take a little time to call Sen. Harry Reid and tell him to respect the hold. You can reach Sen. Reid’s office at (202) 224-3542.

more at:
http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/11/15/fisa-bill-reported-out-of-sjc/

UPDATE FROM WIRED

In Twist, Senate Judiciary Spying Bill Lacks Immunity for Telecoms
By Ryan Singel November 15, 2007 | 5:13:35 PMCategories: NSA

Civil liberties groups got a stunningly unexpected win Thursday as the Senate Judiciary panel passed their version of the new government spying bill out of committee without including a provision giving immunity to telecoms being sued for helping the government secretly spy on Americans.

The biggest winner from the development is the Electronic Frontier Foundation, whose suit against AT&T in federal court would almost certainly have been wiped out by the immunity provision.

The provision - which was part of the version passed by the Senate Intelligence committee in mid-October - was widely expected to make it into the bill, due to the administration's full court press on the issue, the telcos small army of lobbyists and the vocal support of California Democrat Dianne Feintstein. Feinstein's vote was expected to reverse the Dems 10-9 advantage in the committee.

But after a long day of complicated finagling over technical amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and proposed alternatives to total immunity for companies such as AT&T and Verizon, committeee chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) decided to send the bill out of committee without an agreement on immunity.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/11/in-twist-senate.html

As far as the other candidates go, I can't speak for them. Dodd is a true patriot. I'll urge Reid to respect Dodd's hold. He ought to at least as much as he does bush.

:shrug:

They have completed part of the markup, but the SJC is to take up Telecom immunity later, as I understand the situation. And, then their are floor amendments in both chambers and the conference committee, since they have different bills. SO, keep up the pressure and don't let this OP fool you.

I just started a thread too:

ALERT: Tell them NO IMMUNITY = Senate and House Moving on Spying Bills By Ryan Singel
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2288799

Senate Judicial Comm. will take up Telecom immunity later, I believe! No victory there yet.

SO, continue the effort to dissuade the Congress on Telecom immunity. Don't let this OP change your mind. It isn't over yet!!!!

but certainly a step in the right direction & boy do we need a few steps just now, kpete

removed?

can I do a subdued happy dance - PLEASE???

Plus, the Intelligence committee also reported out this bill with Title II in. Contact your Congress critters too! We have a long way to go, with Mukasey saying he will recommend a veto if no immunity is provided.

"Late Update: Here's a bit more detail on what happened on the Judiciary Committee today. Sources say Senator Russ Feingold offered an amendment that would have stripped telecom immunity from the bill, but it was defeated. Then Senator Arlen Specter, the ranking GOPer on the committee, offered a "compromise" amendment saying that in these lawsuits the Federal government, and not the telecoms, would be the defendants.

But because of a procedural difficulty Specter's amendment wasn't voted on -- and Senator Patrick Leahy, the chair of the committee, essentially went around Specter's amendment and moved to have a vote to report the bill out of committee without any telecom immunity in it. That passed along strictly party lines. And that's where we are."

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/11/sources_latest_senate_fisa_bill_does_not_contain_telecom_immunity.php

My head is spinning. So what did they vote on, someone else's amendment?

It's not over by a long stretch, but this means that people like Feinstein who want to give Verizon and AT&T immunity for having helped the government illegally spy on their customers now need 60 votes to include telcom immunity in the bill (i.e., enough to beat a filibuster). They may have those votes, since Feinstein isn't the only sell out. Still, now each Senator has to go on the record as to whether they support illegal spying on American citizens, and that's a vote that probably even faux Dems like DiFi would like to avoid.
http://www.americablog.com/2007/11/this-just-in-good-news-on-telcom.html

Sources: Latest Senate FISA Bill Does Not Contain Telecom Immunity
By Greg Sargent - November 15, 2007, 6:13PM
This is pretty big. As some people have been speculating today, aides to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have confirmed to me that the version of the FISA bill that was just reported out of the Judiciary Committee does not -- repeat, does not -- contain retroactive immunity for the telecom companies.

And a source close to Reid says that this is "most likely" the version that the Majority Leader will file a motion to proceed on. The aide declined to comment when this might happen, however, saying that it could happen next month.

All in all, it looks like a big victory for opponents of telecom immunity.

Late Update: Here's a bit more detail on what happened on the Judiciary Committee today. Sources say Senator Russ Feingold offered an amendment that would have stripped telecom immunity from the bill, but it was defeated. Then Senator Arlen Specter, the ranking GOPer on the committee, offered a "compromise" amendment saying that in these lawsuits the Federal government, and not the telecoms, would be the defendants.

But because of a procedural difficulty Specter's amendment wasn't voted on -- and Senator Patrick Leahy, the chair of the committee, essentially went around Specter's amendment and moved to have a vote to report the bill out of committee without any telecom immunity in it. That passed along strictly party lines. And that's where we are.

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/11/sources_latest_senate_fisa_bill_does_not_contain_telecom_immunity.php

This seems to sum it up.

1. ... Senate Judiciary Committee just reported out a FISA bill that DOES NOT include retroactive immunity for the telecom companies ...
2. This means the Judiciary bill moves to the full Senate WITHOUT the dangerous language included.
3. Retroactive immunity will, however, surely be introduced as an amendment to the FISA bill.
4. If needed Senator Dodd will filibuster any amendment seeking to add retroactive immunity .....

It will be a lot more difficult for those who would enable the erosion of our Constitution to find the 60 votes necessary to stop immunity on its own than it would be for us to find the 40 needed to sustain a filibuster of the bill as a whole if it included immunity.

Today is a great victory for all of us ........

Tim Tagaris
Chris Dodd for President

and in your honor - a coyote HOWLLLLLL!!! (for another short while, kpete)

Doesn't appear to be a victory yet at all. More from Greenwald.

UPDATE X: Matters are a bit clearer, and I think some of these claims of a great victory are looking a bit overstated. It's not as bad as it could have been (i.e, the bill sent to the full Senate with amnesty), but it's not a victory either (the Committee did not strip the bill of amnesty). Instead, once Feingold's amendment failed, they basically agreed not to decide at all on amnesty and leave it to the full Senate. As this AP article states, "the Senate Judiciary Committee punted on Thursday over whether to shield telecommunications companies."

Similarly, this statement from Sen. Leahy says that "the Feingold amendment . . . did not prevail in the committee" and that "The full Senate will yet need to resolve the immunity issue." And a statement from Sen. Feingold (via email) says that "I hope that, when the full Senate considers this issue, the Majority Leader brings up the Senate Judiciary Committee bill instead of the badly flawed Intelligence Committee alternative."

Apparently, the Committee agreed (by a 10-9 party line vote) to do nothing on amnesty -- neither leave it in nor strip it out -- and instead left it to a floor fight to determine if amnesty will end up in the bill passed by the Senate. That's preferable to having the bill sent to the floor with amnesty (because now, it will need 60 votes to overcome Dodd's filibuster and to support an amnesty-specific amendment to put it back into the bill), but it's not as clear of a statement as the Committee's having stripped it out.

UPDATE XI: Having just spoken with several people involved in today's morass, I have a lot more clarity about what happened. What I described in the prior update is accurate. Now, the next step will be focused on Sen. Reid. He has virtually unlimited discretion to decide what version of the bill to introduce to the full Senate. He could introduce the Intelligence Committee version (with amnesty), the Judiciary Committee version (without amnesty), the House version, or he could just introduce something entirely new altogether, something that gets negotiated between Rockefeller and Reid. "

http://salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/11/15/amnesty_fisa/index.html

He simply stripped the issue from the bill entirely. Isn't that the sort of thing that we've been demanding from dems?

:woohoo:

:kick: & recommended

In effect, this is a law requiring Bush to report his own crimes :rofl:

Why are Bush and the Rs really in a tizzy? Why the veto threat, and why is team-player Mukasey taking the fall for the veto idea.
Because the House Version passed today "Requires an Audit of the President’s Surveillance Program and Other Warrantless Surveillance Programs"

MORE: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2294411