Telecom Spy Suits Dismissed / UPDATE: EFF, ACLU Plan Appeal

Bad news for freedom. Snip from WIRED Threat Level piece by David Kravets:

A federal judge on Wednesday dismissed lawsuits targeting the nation's telecommunication companies for their participation in President George W. Bush's once-secret electronic eavesdropping program. In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker upheld summer legislation protecting the companies from the lawsuits. The legislation, which then-Sen. Barack Obama voted for, also granted the government the authority to monitor American's telecommunications without warrants if the subject was communicating with somebody overseas suspected of terrorism.

Full story here. Image courtesy Billboard Liberation Front.

UPDATE: EFF and ACLU plan to appeal the ruling:

EFF and the ACLU are co-coordinating counsel for all 46 outstanding lawsuits concerning the government's warrantless surveillance program. Additionally, EFF is representing the plaintiffs in Hepting v. AT&T, a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of millions of AT&T customers whose private domestic communications and communications records were illegally handed over to the National Security Agency.

"By passing the retroactive immunity for the telecoms' complicity in the warrantless wiretapping program, Congress abdicated its duty to the American people," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl. "Now it is up to the Court of Appeals to stand up for the Constitution, and reverse today's decision."

[mdh June 3, 2009 2:01 PM]

This, of course, means that if you're on an NSA list then anyone you talk with out of the country is, by fiat, a suspected terrorist.

I wonder if NSA can route wholly domestic calls through Canada to justify the listening in?

[mermaid June 3, 2009 2:22 PM]

this is not a wonderful thing

[Beelzebuddy June 3, 2009 2:30 PM]

But it does involve directories.

[mdh June 3, 2009 2:30 PM]

this is not a wonderful thing

"wonderful" is not strictly a synonym for "good"

[nutbastard June 3, 2009 2:47 PM]

yay, 'change' we can believe in.

just like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, 'belief' is the only thing giving it any recognition in reality. But I guess that's why it wasn't "Change you can expect" - that would be silly. But it's fun to believe, and it makes for very obedient little boys and girls.

[nutbastard June 3, 2009 2:51 PM]

@#4

words that are synonyms for wonderful:

extraordinary (which this isn't - it's downright typical)

admirable (nope)

amazing (not really)

etc etc.

the only one that really fits is 'tremendous'.

[Phikus June 3, 2009 2:53 PM]

It's amazing, though not altogether surprising, how easily the Constitution can be disregarded via half-baked justification.

And still not a shred of evidence this has done anything to make Americans safer. Anything in the name of national security, no matter how absurd, right?

I don't think we voted for this.

[Takuan June 3, 2009 3:00 PM]

wonderful? marvelous?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxqxJlu2-aw

[Falcon_Seven June 3, 2009 4:08 PM]

@6 - The only word that describes this correctly is FUBAR.

[Cicada June 3, 2009 5:37 PM]

Let's see...run the companies up on charges, and the next time the government wants a large company to do something, the company'll have its legal department working all-nighters and shitting bricks before they budge a finger, if then.
Give the companies a break, and the next time the government wants something, companies will be happy to oblige.

Now, if you're in the government, do you want to make your job harder in the future?

[sum.zero June 3, 2009 8:09 PM]

@ mermaid

i think you meant to say:

G

[stealthisbook June 3, 2009 8:20 PM]

I think there may be some hope in this ruling. Firedoglake has a pretty thorough ongoing analysis up.

To summarize so far-
Judge Walker dismissed the case based on the retroactive immunity that Congress gave in the FISA act. He didn't rule on constitutional grounds. Indeed, he specifically refers to Jewell v. United States as the proper solution under current law as it goes after the government actors in authorizing the program. He also leaves a broad hint that an amended case challenging telecom immunity could be brought if the plaintiffs can find post-2007 evidence of cooperation with the wiretapping program.

My view is that a loss (for now) on telecom immunity that bolsters the case for convicting Bush administration wrongdoers is on the whole a good thing. Considering that Judge Walker is also presiding over Jewell, there may be some messaging between the lines on just that.

Unfortunately, the great hope in bringing the telecom case to trial was that we could use the details found through discovery to make the case against the government so there may be a chicken and egg problem.

[mermaid June 3, 2009 9:05 PM]

@sum zero
I did!
but I didn't think anyone would get it

also J

[jackie31337 June 4, 2009 12:53 AM]

It's OK to say "fuck" here, right? Because that's about the only reaction I have to this right now. FUCK!

[Anonymous June 4, 2009 11:56 AM]

STEALTHISBOOK has a point. Dismissing a civil suit is not the same as setting precedent in law.

Protecting the telecoms from what will most likely be found to be government wrongdoing isn't a bad thing. Frankly, the idea of seeking monetary damages from the telecoms always seemed like a bullying tactic by the EFF, just like how the telecoms were likely bullied into cooperation in the first place.

The law and the program itself needs to be challenged.