[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 24, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1325]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page E1325]]
                      FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                             HON. RON PAUL

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                         Friday, June 20, 2008

  Mr. PAUL. Madam Speaker, I regret that due to the unexpected last-
minute appearance of this measure on the legislative calendar this 
week, a prior commitment has prevented me from voting on the FISA 
amendments. I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul 
attempt, and I certainly would have voted against this one as well.
  The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly 
violates the Fourth Amendment by allowing the Federal Government to 
engage in the bulk collection of American citizens' communications 
without a search warrant. That U.S. citizens can have their private 
communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is 
anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.
  In addition to gutting the Fourth Amendment, this measure will 
deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by 
telecommunication companies involved in the Administration's illegal 
wiretapping program the right to seek redress in the courts for the 
wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for 
retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke 
the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions 
once the law has been changed. Ex post facto laws have long been 
considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding 
Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the 
Constitution that ``No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be 
passed.'' How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That 
alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.
  Madam Speaker, we should understand that decimating the protections 
that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more 
dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats 
may exist. We can protect this country without violating the 
Constitution and I urge my colleagues to reconsider their support for 
this measure.

                          ____________________