This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
I freely admit I'm not the most agile dancer when it comes to doing the legal tango. That said, reading from H.R.6304 the wording of it seems to leave some "better" avenues open. I say "better" because of the possible and probable economic consequences of having every major telcom in the U.S. paying out hundreds of millions of dollars (est. from my nether regions) in legal fees and settlements for their involvement in domestic spying.
Yes, this amendment releases the telcoms and any other private citizen or entity from responsibility to follow the law. It also states that this is pursuant to these entities being told in writing from the U.S. Attorney General that what they did was within legal boundaries and that ultimately it is a federal court that decides whether or not the AG was correct in his/her decision.
So, here's my line of thought. Constitutionally speaking, unless the 4th and 11th amendments are ratified, this whole add-on to the FISA is without legal footing. What it does do is removes the avenue of legal censure to private citizens/entities in regards to wiretapping. This could be a good thing if we have a Judicial branch who will find illegal doings in this mess. If (I know, bear with me) domestic wiretapping is illegal (it is, according to the Constitution) and if private citizens/entities are not accountable then where does our good Attorney General (Edwards - hopefully) go to right this? Upline. Whose name is on these certifications? If these actions are found to be illegal and were wrongly certified by Gonzales and/or Mukasey then they are facing indictments. If they are steadfast in their misplaced loyalty then they'll stand trial alone. I for one do not attribute such grand things as loyalty and honor (no matter how twisted) to them which leaves open an avenue of proper investigation all the way up the chain of command. While I'm not happy or even anywhere content with this amendment to the FISA - if I close my eyes and wish real hard maybe come Jan. 20, 2009 we'll have a Judicial Branch that is unafraid to uphold the Constitution. In the meantime, for those who are complicit in perpetrating these crimes against the citizens of the United States, we can just keep feeding them more rope.
EDIT: Just to add in case I wasn't clear - I hate what was done by our House, what they've taken from us. I'm terrified of what this means for us in regards to the privacy we've already lost and how many other rights will be taken by these perpetrators of injustice. I'm trying to look at a chess game here and still not seeing a good outcome am resigned to look for one that is "better" than what Shrub is offering. Our speaker has failed us, every single "aye," "abstain" or "absent" has failed us. So yeah, I want my mom and I miss Molly Ivins.