Dingell Accuses White House of ‘Stonewalling’ on FISA Documents
No decision on immunity for phone companies’ reported participation in a post Sept. 11 warrantless electronic surveillance program can be considered until the White House provides documents requested weeks ago, House Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, D-Mich., said Thursday. “The Department of Justice’s stonewalling is preventing Congress from determining whether or not Americans’ right to privacy has been violated by the Administration’s surveillance program,” said Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Bart Stupak, D-Mich.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
“We are being asked to grant immunity to phone and Internet companies, without even knowing what personal records were turned over to the administration,” said Stupak, who signed a letter sent to Attorney General Michael Mukasey that also was signed by Dingell and Telecom Subcommittee Chairman Ed Markey, D-Mass. DoJ’s failure to respond is “unacceptable,” the letter said. The department is preventing phone companies from defending themselves and “depriving Congress of the ability to evaluate the legitimacy of their arguments,” the letter said.
The lawmakers promised to urge members not to consider granting immunity to telecom carriers unless the documents are provided, the letter said. Dingell’s letter was released the day the Senate Judiciary Committee deferred action on a compromise bill (S-2402) by Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., that would offer to substitute the government for telephone companies in surveillance-related litigation. Specter has tried to broker a compromise between the Senate Intelligence Committee -- which passed a bill granting phone companies retroactive immunity from challenges by privacy advocates -- and Judiciary Democrats, including Chairman Patrick Leahy, D- Vt., who vigorously oppose that.
“I intend to offer [S-2402] as an amendment” if the Senate takes up Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act legislation (S-2248) next week, which was undecided at our deadline, Specter said. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., needs to make a decision on what legislative strategy to take, and it’s unlikely he wants in-fighting among Democrats on the Senate floor, said people familiar with the legislation. The immunity provision will be handled and a bill will go forward, predicted Greg Nojeim, senior counsel of the Center for Democracy & Technology in a briefing Wednesday. Thornier issues revolve around decisions about how much power the executive branch can exert using “state secrets” power, which allows the president to suppress documents he believes are critical to national security.
Privacy advocates have balked at President Bush’s invocation of state secrets in the surveillance case because they think the administration is overreaching and setting a dangerous precedent. For them, courts such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court should review a wide-ranging surveillance program such as that authorized after Sept. 11, and it would require warrants in cases involving surveillance of U.S. citizens. “I think you will see a lot of mix and match” between the Senate Intelligence Committee bill and a measure that the Judiciary Committee approved that didn’t provide immunity.
Leahy said he would take up Specter’s bill next week if the Senate doesn’t have time to address FISA legislation. “I commend his effort and look forward to that discussion,” Leahy said.