EFF
EFF v. Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Opinion
Opinion
I. BACKGROUND
A. Enactment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments
Efforts to provide liability protection for the providers began in 2007. In April of that year, as part of a broader dis- cussion of reforming electronic surveillance laws, the Depart- ment of Justice (“DOJ”) sent a legislative proposal to Congress, which included a provision creating retroactive immunity for telecommunications providers alleged to have participated in the surveillance activities. In August 2007, Congress enacted the Protect America Act of 2007 (“PAA”), Pub. L. No. 110-55, 121 Stat. 552, a temporary measure, which did not include a liability shield.
Contemporaneously with the PAA debate, news organiza- tions such as The New York Times and Newsweek reported on a “campaign” involving “some of Washington’s most promi- nent lobbying and law firms”1 to pressure the Bush adminis- 1 The Newsweek article included the following: Among those coordinating the industry’s effort are two well- connected capital players who both worked for President George H.W. Bush: Verizon general counsel William Barr, who served as attorney general under 41, and AT&T senior executive vice president…