« On Trust and Betrayal, Indicators of a Competitive Market | Weblog | When Big Government Thinks Big, Big Things Get Built »

Rule of Law v. Rule of Da Man - I vote for Rule of Law

I am starting to worry that nobody in charge in Washington, D.C., is looking out for our long-term interests when it comes to being protected from unknown powers using the Internet and all the information out on the Web to spy on us. Have we become the Soviet Union? Have we forgotten what a police state is? Have we become so driven by fear that we are ready to check it all in because of those punks/goons at Al Queda? Can this really be happening? I think the Internet makes this issue of illegal domestic surveillance a much more serious issue, one we will all be focusing on at some point, I hope before it's not too late.

If Congress retroactively grants immunity, it will be one more blow against the respect of the rule of law. Not a fatal blow to be sure. Our Constitution and system of government have weathered such storms in the past. But a severe blow nonetheless. Congress will send a signal to the corporations that control the vital services on which we all depend, and to which we must entrust our private information, that they may safely collude with the Executive branch to break the law. Because a compliant Congress and a strong Executive will make it all right later. Yet these are the very companies into which we must most carefully inculcate the respect for the rule of law, because they have access to our most personal information and we have no way of discovering when our rights are violated.

Congress will also send a message to us. We will learn that our rights must yield to the interests of the President and the Powerful when they work together in the name of national security. That we must accustom ourselves to such violations in the "post-9/11 world." And while powerful Democrats, brought within the inner circle by the crumbs of information the Administration grudgingly shares, may not go as far as Rep. Lamar Smith in saying we should thank the telephone companies for preferring the illegal demands of the President to the rule of law, we shall be taught to sympathize with them rather than hold them accountable for their choices. And we shall know that, when faced with similar choices in the future, they and every other industry will chose to honor the demands of the Executive rather than honor the demands of the rule of law.

Such a message undermines our national security and our way of life far more powerfully than any Al-Qeda attack. When Chris Dodd frames this as a fight to restore the Constitution, that's not overbroad campaign rhetoric. It is the literal truth. For without respect for the rule of law, the Constitution has no meaning or purpose save as a tool for demagogues who revel in its power while ignoring its intent. And when Dodd calls on Democrats to remember that the public elected them to stop these abuses of our rights, to reign in lawbreakers rather than "thank" them, he also tells the truth. I can only hope Harry Reid and his colleagues on both sides of the aisle pay attention. Harold Feld: So Much For All That "We Are A Nation of Laws" Stuff . . . .

Harold Feld, an attorney with the Media Access Project, provides the best coverage and argument yet for why we should all be very, very concerned about this telecom immunity issue.

He has the background to know:

Harold Feld, MAP's Senior Vice President, joined MAP in August 1999 after practicing communications, Internet, and energy law at Covington & Burling. Mr. Feld served as co-chair of the Federal Communications Bar Association's Online Committee, and has written numerous articles on Internet law and communications policy for trade publications and legal journals. Mr. Feld won the 2000 Burton Award for excellence in writing by a nonacademic. Mr. Feld graduated magna cum laude from Princeton University in 1989, and magna cum laude from Boston University Law School in 1993. Mr. Feld clerked for the Hon. John M. Ferren of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Media Access Project

In other coverage of potential Telecom Immunity this week, there was this exchange of Letters to the Editor at the New York Times, worth a look.

Posted on November 12, 2007 at 08:34 PM

Comments


Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)