The Obama administration defended the law granting immunity to te...

be unconstitutional because it seemed to give “literally no guidance for the exercise of discretion” by the attorney general (CD Feb 13 p8). But “nothing in the Constitution prevents Congress from granting to the Attorney General broad discretion regarding whether and when to use his authority” under the surveillance law, the Justice Department told the court last week. Further, the Act doesn’t delegate “anything resembling legislative power” to the attorney general, DoJ said. Rather, the official’s role “is limited to gathering and presenting” facts in court, it said. Even if Congress did give the attorney general decision-making authority, it provided the “specific and narrow” guidelines required, the department said. DoJ’s brief marked the Obama administration entry into the court case. It’s “disappointing” that DoJ’s position hasn’t changed under the new president, Cindy Cohn, the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s legal director, said in an interview. EFF is representing customers of AT&T and other carriers in the case. The filing looked “no different” from what EFF would have expected from the Bush administration, she said. As a senator, President Barack Obama voted for the FISA legislation, despite having publicly opposed telco immunity. In a statement Thursday, a Justice Department spokesman said the immunity bill “is the law of the land, and as such the Department of Justice defends it in court.” But DoJ’s hands weren’t tied, Cohn said. On the bright side, she said, the somewhat unenthusiastic statement leaves open the possibility that the Obama administration may reconsider the official executive branch view. It’s unclear when the judge will issue a ruling, Cohn said. Judge Walker probably won’t schedule another oral argument, but he could ask for more briefs from parties, she said.