Derek Slater of the Electronic Frontier Foundation sez,
Since its participation in the president's illegal wiretapping program came to light in late 2005, AT&T has desperately tried to avoid accountability.
But, once upon a time, nearly eighty years ago, AT&T fought at the Supreme Court to stop the government's warrantless surveillance of Americans' private communications. In Olmstead v. USA, AT&T co-authored an amicus brief that outspokenly defended its customers' privacy:
"The telephone has become part and parcel of the social and business intercourse of the people of the United States, and this telephone system offers a means of espionage to which general warrants and writs of assistance were the puniest instruments of tyranny and oppression."
"Writs of assistance" were used by King George II and III to carry out wide-ranging searches of anyone, anywhere, and anytime regardless of whether they were suspected of a crime. These "hated writs" spurred colonists toward revolution and directly motivated James Madison's crafting of the Fourth Amendment.
If AT&T in 1928 thought that wiretapping made the "hated writs" look puny, how can it now cooperate with the president's massive and illegal spying program?
EFF has sued AT&T for its role in the government's dragnet surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans, and next Wednesday the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments in our case. As AT&T's brief from 80 years ago makes clear, the most basic essence of our Constitution is at stake.
(Thanks, Derek!)
