Dodd: Rule of law still matters here

10/21/07
Sen. Christopher J. Dodd is running for president on a platform of restoring the U.S. Constitution. Funny that someone should have to make clear he supports the most important document in our nation’s history, but given the past seven years, it’s good to have it out there.
And he’s making good on his promises. He has promised to do everything he can to stop a bill approved by a Senate committee that would grant telecommunications companies legal immunity for their roles in assisting the government since 2001 in a possibly illegal surveillance program. He is taking a stand in favor of the rule of law.
Major telephone carriers including, AT&T and Verizon, face lawsuits over their roles in a government eavesdropping program that reportedly began after Sept. 11, 2001. Dodd describes the recent Senate proposal as “amnesty for telecommunications companies that enabled the president’s assault on the Constitution by providing personal information on their customers without judicial authorization.”
The attacks of 9/11 brought unprecedented fear, and inspired a regimen of drastic remedies reputedly designed to ensure safety under any circumstances. But regardless of what happens — attacks, explosions, mass casualties or other attacks — this remains a nation of laws. If the administration wanted to change laws on eavesdropping and wiretapping, the way to do that was through Congress. It’s not as though lawmakers prone to cave in at the first sign of perceived weakness were going to deny the administration anything it demanded in the name of “security.”
Whatever one’s opinion of Dodd’s stance, what is undeniable is that he is taking an unpopular stand, within the Senate if not in the country at large. Leading Democrats support the retroactive immunity, and have indicated they will not let Dodd’s promised “hold” stand in the way, regardless of Senate precedent. Dodd is taking an important stance based on what’s right, not on what is easiest politically.
The government must not be in the business of interfering with judicial decisions. Let the courts decide whether the suits against the telecommunications firms have merit, rather than grant a blanket, retroactive amnesty against all conceivable wrongdoing. And give Dodd credit, again, for remembering why we have a Constitution in the first place.