Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
This will be known as the year the government tried to legitimize its warrantless spying program. The once-secret National Security Agency program that since 2001 used U.S. phone companies to tap into the communications of terrorism suspects on U.S. soil without a judge’s signature was facing increasing pressure from a Democratic Congress and dozens of lawsuits. In early January, President George W. Bush unexpectedly submitted the controversial program to oversight by the court that presides over wiretap requests. But the judicial scrutiny led to court orders curbing the government’s ability to bypass the court. The administration then argued that in order to keep Americans safe, the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act needed to be reformed and the government’s authority to monitor communications expanded. The Justice Department and the NSA launched a public relations campaign to persuade Congress to amend the law to allow warrantless eavesdropping on persons abroad, even if those calls or e-mails passed through U.S. phone facilities. In August, Congress hastily approved a temporary fix, giving the administration almost everything it sought but only for six months. The battle over permanent changes since then has turned on one pending request: legal immunity for the telecom companies that aided the government’s secret spying efforts. Several of the largest telecoms � Verizon, AT&T, and Bell South � are the focus of about 40 lawsuits, some of them class actions, claiming that their cooperation broke the law. In April, a former AT&T technician disclosed the extent of the collaboration, noting how the NSA set up shop in the company’s San Francisco office to monitor and intercept all international and domestic calls as well as Internet traffic. The immunity question has sharply divided Congress mostly along party lines, but even some Democrats have split on the issue. On Dec. 17, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) shelved a measure granting retroactive immunity amid mounting opposition and instead pledged to take up the bill when Congress reconvenes in January.
Pedro Ruz Gutierrez can be contacted at [email protected].

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.