Russ Feingold: “as I have said repeatedly on the Senate floor, I strongly oppose granting unjustified retroactive immunity to companies…”

“as I have said repeatedly on the Senate floor, I strongly oppose granting unjustified retroactive immunity to companies that allegedly participated in the President's illegal wiretapping program, which went on for more than 5 years. It is unnecessary because under current law, companies already have immunity from civil liability if they comply with a court order or with a certification from the Attorney General that a court order is not required and all statutory requirements have been met. Congress should leave it to the courts to evaluate whether the companies alleged to have cooperated with the program would deserve immunity under this existing law rather than changing the rules of the game after the fact. That is why I have been a staunch supporter of the Dodd amendment to strike the immunity provision from this bill entirely. Given my strong opposition to any retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies, I want to explain why I voted in favor of two amendments that proposed alternatives to but did not entirely eliminate retroactive immunity. Amendment No. 3927, offered by Senators Specter and Whitehouse, would have substituted the Government for the companies in the pending litigation, and amendment No. 3919, proposed by Senator Feinstein, would have directed the FISA Court to evaluate whether companies complied with the existing immunity provision or otherwise acted in good faith. I do not believe that either of these proposals is necessary.”