Home

Blog

P.L. 110-261, The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (8 comments ↓ | 8 wiki edits: view article ↓)

  • This item is from the 110th Congress (2007-2008) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.

H.R. 6304 would amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to establish a procedure for authorizing certain acquisitions of foreign intelligence.

(read more ↓)

From the Blog

Obama, Surveillance, and Telecom Immunity

This week the Senate is scheduled to take up H.R. 6304, The FISA Amendments Act of 2008, the latest iteration of controversial legislation to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The bill passed the House on June 20th. One of the most inter...

Telecom Immunity Reax

Yesterday the Senate passed H.R. 6304, The FISA Amendments Act of 2008, clearing it for the President’s signature. Among other things, it gave telecommunications companies immunity for allegedly participating in illegal wiretapping at the behest...

Congress’s Work in the Supreme Court

With Hurricane Sandy bearing down on the mid-Atlantic, the executive branch of the federal government will be closed on Monday, October 29th. But the judicial branch is carrying on with business as usual. Monday morning’s argument is an important...

Visitor Comments Comments Feed for This Bill

Can't Be Fooled

July 7, 2008, 10:48am (report abuse)

FISA wiretap laws were created as a result of presidential abuse in the past. They knew it was a crime. But the telecoms which are granted huge government contracts (some illegally) felt it was OK to comply. AT&T is the biggest conspirator in the game and not only cooperates, but develops systems (without being asked to do so) which have created the infrastructure for our newly developing police state. President Bush has never lobbied so hard for any other issue than he has for telco immunity. Why is that? because if the telcos are held responsible for their crimes, it would send a chilling message to all of the other companies who are engaged in the creation of a police state that we don't know about (yet) and would effectively set back their plan for decades. Mr. Bush understands this very well. The second, and more important aspect of his lobbying efforts are related to self-protection. He understands that if the telcos escape judicial scrutiny.

Lowell Faubion

July 7, 2008, 2:45pm (report abuse)

I oppose this bill,because it is against the constitution of the United States.It does away with the fourth amendment to the constitution. Thank you.

mr. smith

July 7, 2008, 6:20pm (report abuse)

*chuckle* No, thank you. Break the Constitution on someone else's watch.

LTC_SGA

July 9, 2008, 12:01am (report abuse)

Having been part of the "ops" side of the house people don't realize this bill is for the bad guys, not regular people who have nothing to hide or are not engaged in big time foreign espionage. My question is-why are you so paranoid?

The Warden

July 11, 2008, 3:30am (report abuse)

Paranoia has nothing to do with it. This law violates not one, but two clauses of the Constitution: Amendment IV, the searches and seizures provision; and Article I, section 9, which prohibits Congress from passing ex post facto (i.e., retroactive) laws.

The definition of "bad guys" is adjustable at the convenience of the Administration. The FISA Amendments Act 2008 is the nose under the camel's tent for total erasure of the Fourth Amendment.

klapa

July 11, 2008, 1:32pm (report abuse)

Couldn't agree with Warden more - whatever administration is in power will use these laws to spy on anyone they please. Just look at the main reason the law was enacted in the first place - Richard Nixon wiretapping his political enemies.

John Deeds

July 27, 2008, 11:13pm (report abuse)

This Bill that became Law, is so muddied down in twists and turns, that it is difficult for the average reader to forget that it is an 'amendment' to a CIA needed Law from 1978. It only seems to effect certain Americans who are 'abroad' and who suspected of some crime worthy of being bugged and mugged--abroad! Remember that the CIA has 'no power' within the USA!

Nevertheless, I would be against this Law (too late to appeal it for us--and 'they' aren't about to change it, because that is how these types of under-handed Bills become Law, as they know that we American voters are asleep at the wheel anyway)due to the ease by which the CIA and the AG can obtain the powers to have a free hand at taping and mugging someone 'of interest.'

'Just don't travel beyond the USA, and you'll be all right. Welcome to this Brave New World.

Dee Frances

November 2, 2008, 12:22pm (report abuse)

If you haven't been watching this bill/law lately, take a look at the

whitehouse.gov site.

On Oct. 7th, Bush made changes to this law by EXECUTIVE ORDER. Now, the people charged to oversee this do not have to be 'approved' by the Congress.

They are appointed and in lower positions (Deputy Director of the FBI - Not the director....)

I think someone is stacking the government to have his people still doing his bidding!!!

RSS Feeds for This Bill

Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)