Russ Feingold: “I opposed the amendment because it unnecessarily restricts the court's ability to consider important constitutional and…”

“I opposed the amendment because it unnecessarily restricts the court's ability to consider important constitutional and statutory issues related to this legislation. The amendment limits the time for the court's consideration of challenges to directives issued under this law to a mere 30 days, unless 'necessary to comport with the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.' There would be no other basis for the court to extend its deliberations to a 31st day. This amendment could have serious unintended consequences. There may be many decisions that the court can, in fact, make in a relatively short period of time. But there may also be issues that the court will have to consider that could take longer. There have been many questions raised about the meaning of many of the provisions of this bill. The court will certainly be required to address some of these complex statutory interpretation issues. There have also been serious constitutional concerns raised about this bill that the court will need to consider. This is new legislation that radically changes how surveillance is conducted, and there are numerous complex issues that the court will be called on to resolve.”