Snappy newsletters. Simple Facebook sharing. Spirited comments. Sweet features are waiting… GET THEM NOW!

US Judge Boots Warrantless Wiretap Cases Vs. Telecoms

By the Associated Press

Posted Jun 3, 2009 2:17 PM CDT

(AP) – A federal judge has tossed out more than three dozen lawsuits filed against the nation's telecommunications companies for allegedly taking part in the government's email and telephone eavesdropping program that was done without court approval. The dismissals were widely expected after Congress in July agreed on new surveillance rules that include immunity from lawsuits for telecommunications companies that allegedly helped the US spy on Americans.

A US District judge today upheld the constitutionality of the new surveillance rules and dismissed the lawsuits. But the judge did allow the losing attorneys a chance to revise their lawsuits to include new allegations, if any, that aren't covered by the immunity rules.

Federal court in Paducah, Ky.
Federal court in Paducah, Ky.   (AP Photo)
Former President Bush.
Former President Bush.   (AP Photo)
A Verizon lineman works on a telephone pole.
A Verizon lineman works on a telephone pole.   (AP Photo)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
To report an error on this story, notify our editors.
A snapshot of the day's best news stories.
 
COMMENTS
Showing 3 of 3 comments
psycada
Jun 3, 2009 8:24 AM CDT
It sure does. It sucks even more to have a conscience while doing it. If you haven't heard of her, Google Sibel Edmonds. Her story just plain sucks for her because she was gagged by a federal judge and can't even talk about what she learned.
psycada
Jun 3, 2009 8:11 AM CDT
Last I checked, warrant-less wiretaps are prevented by the Bill of Rights (I know, I know, its just a piece of paper......) I also understand through my studies of prohibition, only an additional amendment can override any parts of prior amendments, and absolutely no law enacted by congress overrules the bill of rights. Under this argument, the immunity clause is illegal, thus null and void and not admissible as an argument in a US court of Law. Anyone with common sense can see this although judges continue to deny this fact, yet can't provide adequate logic to justify it.
TiredMemeCat
Jun 3, 2009 7:36 AM CDT
Gutless betrayers of our rights to privacy. Apparently they had their fingers crossed when taking the oath of office. 'In order to defend democracy, we must destroy it.'

Copyright 2012 Newser, LLC. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. AP contributed to this report.

More Newser Stories

Kansas Judge Blocks Law to Defund Planned Parenthood

Vacancies Leave Federal Courts in Crisis

Partisan Tiff Leaves Federal Courts Without Judges

Prop 8 Ruling Tough for Supreme Court to Overturn

Feds May Have to Pay Terror Group for Rights Violations


NEWS FROM OUR PARTNERS
Other Sites We Like:   24/7 Wall St.   |   Betty Confidential   |   BuzzFeed   |   Cracked   |   Fark   |   Timelines   |   The Frisky   |   Geek Sugar   |   NewsOne