Greg Sargent reports:
This is pretty big. As some people have been speculating today, aides to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have confirmed to me that the version of the FISA bill that was just reported out of the Judiciary Committee does not -- repeat, does not -- contain retroactive immunity for the telecom companies.
And a source close to Reid says that this is "most likely" the version that the Majority Leader will file a motion to proceed on. The aide declined to comment when this might happen, however, saying that it could happen next month.
Some updates below.
Firedoglake has some play-by-play:
Here’s what I know thus far this evening:
– The Feingold amendment stripping immunity out of the FISA bill was defeated in an 11-8 vote (UPDATE: or possibly a 12-7 vote — conflicting reports on this.). Democrats voting against it were: Feinstein, Whitehouse and Kohl. (No idea as yet on which Republican voted for it, but I’m working on it.)
– The bill was reported out of the SJC for Title I only — nothing on Title II/Immunity was reported out. The final motion to report the bill out of committee without the immunity provisions passed with ten votes.
– The Specter "compromise" (read: WH CYA) was never voted on today.
Update [2007-11-15 19:2:9 by MLDB]:Wired has a statement from the ACLU:
"We appreciate the work of Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI) to protect the civil liberties of all Americans. We still have reservations with both the House and Senate bills, and will continue to work to improve the legislation. It is heartening to know that people who feel their privacy was violated by the phone companies and by their own government are one step closer to having their day in court."
This is really good news. Nobody (me included) seemed to think there was a chance this was going to happen. Combine this with the RESTORE ACT from the House...
- No Retroactive Immunity. The bill is silent on retroactive immunity because the Administration has refused to provide Congress with documents on the specifics of the President’s warrantless surveillance program. However, the bill does provide prospective immunity for those complying with court orders issued pursuant to this authority.
...and things are actually shaping up quite nicely.
Update [2007-11-15 19:43:4 by MLDB]:One thing is for sure...Patrick Leahy deserves some love for this:
Lawmakers on the Senate Judiciary Committee approved 10-to-9 Thursday a bill authorizing the federal government's warrantless wiretapping program without a clause offering immunity to telephone companies that may have cooperated with the program.
Just minutes before the vote, the committee had voted 11-to-8 in favor of immunity for the phone companies.
Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Cal., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., voted with the nine Republicans on the panel in favor of preserving the immunity clause.
But in a strange twist that left many wondering what had happened, just minutes after this vote, Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, called for a separate vote to approve the bill without the section of the legislation with the immunity provisions.
The committee approved Leahy's call 10-9, along party lines.
That "strange twist" was Leahy saying "enough is enough"