Submitted by Matt, Feb 22, 2008 18:29

The companies in question turned over the data in question illegally. THAT is why they're being sued. And that is why it is essential that the lawsuits proceed: to ensure that people and companies will not violate help the government violate our Fourth Amendment rights. Furthermore the sentence, "If we have laws that discourage private companies from assisting a punctiliously law-abiding administration in the future, we lose," is disingenuous. The sentence implies that the House's bill failure to provide immunity for breaking the law will somehow discourage companies from complying with legal orders, which is absurd. If a company is presented with a legal order they will comply - and rightly so. If, however, they are again approached to do something illegal they will know that there will actually be consequences. And my understanding of the whole "rule of law" thing is that laws are enforced and criminals pay for their actions.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.