The ACLU statement is flat-out wrong in several key respects. First, the activities that the ACLU is calling "illegal" have not been determined to be illegal by any court. Therefore, this term is an opinion as opposed to a fact. Second, the ACLU's assertions about the legislation preempting state investigations of violations of customers' privacy rights is wrong. The legislation will not automatically dismiss the litigation against the carriers. Instead, the US Attorney General and the courts will evaluate whether the carriers responded, in good faith, to government requests for assistance. Third, the legislation will not, as the ACLU wrongly claims, immunize government officials. Any cases or claims against the government, which is responsible for these programs, will continue. Furthermore, Congress can continue its oversight of the officials running the programs.
In my role as the Attorney General, my highest priority is to ensure the safety and well-being of Rhode Island citizens. So when I decided to support the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance amendments, I had the welfare of our citizens first and foremost in my mind.
In my years as a prosecutor in the Narcotics and Organized Crime Unit, during which time I participated in court-authorized wiretap investigations, and now as the Attorney General, I know from personal experience that the assistance provided by the carriers is absolutely essential to our law enforcement agencies. From kidnapping cases to drug investigations, we have always counted on the carriers' help to do our jobs and protect the people of Rhode Island.
Now, when we all face the ongoing threat of terrorism, the carriers are providing critical assistance to our intelligence and law enforcement agencies in their fight to keep us all secure. If American companies face massive litigation every time they try to help our intelligence agencies, however, they will stop cooperating -- and public safety will suffer.
What if we were conducting a court-authorized wiretap investigation, right now, and somebody's life was at stake? What if a carrier chose not to assist out of fear of being sued and, consequently, we were not able to prevent a tragedy from occurring? Will Steve Brown and the ACLU visit the family with me when I try to explain what happened? I doubt it.
For these reasons, 21 of my fellow Attorneys General signed the same letter, endorsing the legislation. We all understand that it makes no sense to punish private companies for trying to help us all fight terrorism.