Skip to Content

Floor Statements

Floor Statement on H.R. 3733, the FISA Amendments Act

Washington, DC, March 13, 2008
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this carefully crafted legislation which gives our intelligence agencies all the tools they say they need to protect our country while protecting our fundamental civil liberties.


In the last few weeks, we have heard countless assertions from our colleagues on the other side that are false and misleading. They claim that we allowed the Protect America Act to expire, when it was the Republicans who blocked attempts to extend that bill temporarily, and they continue to claim that retroactive immunity for the telecom companies is necessary for the security of the country.


The telecom companies aided the Administration's surveillance program. Some people, American citizens, believe their constitutional rights were violated and brought a lawsuit against the government and telecom companies.

There are two narratives here. One is that these companies patriotically aided the Administration to protect Americans from terrorists. The other is that they conspired with a lawless Administration to violate the constitutional rights of Americans. Which of these narratives is right is for a court to decide. It is not the role of Congress to decide legal cases between private parties. That is why we have courts.
We had told the telecom companies they would not be subject to lawsuits for doing their duty. But whether they were doing their duty or abusing the rights of Americans is precisely the issue.
In any event, the existing law already provides absolute immunity if their help was requested and if they were given a statement by the Attorney General or various other government officials stating that the requested help did not require a warrant or court order and would not break the law. They have immunity. Whether those statements are true or not, they can rely absolutely on the government's assertions.

So why do they think they need retroactive immunity? Because of the Administration's sweeping assertion of the State secrets doctrine, will has prevented the companies from claiming their immunity.
This bill allows the telecom companies in secret in court to present the evidence for their immunity and to get their immunity, if they obeyed the law. And I remind that obeying the law means simply obtaining a statement from the government that the company's help is needed and that the requested help does not require a court order or violated the law. A company that assisted in spying on its customers without getting that simple assurance from the government does not deserve immunity. And even if we voted retroactive immunity, they would still have to prove that immunity for what they do next week in the same way, and they would have the same problem. So, by solving the State secrets problem, we give the companies the immunity they need, if they need it, and if they obeyed the law. This still gives our intelligence agencies what they need. I urge its adoption.
Back to top