Suppose that--despite Democratic majorities, public opinion, Dodd's leadership, overwhelming public sentiment, and the quaint little 4th Amendment to the Constitution--broad telecom immunity is nonetheless voted and signed into law.
OK, that sucked! ...but what next?
I am way not a lawyer, but I have an oddball notion: might it be possible to force the issue into court, thus keeping it alive despite the telcom's immunity, by putting telecom providers on the legal offensive?
I'm hoping a few legal minds will read this diary and say whether I'm on to something or just out to lunch.
Here's my idea. I don't have cell service, but I gather that many plans, though billed month-to-month, are really longer contracts, with a penalty for early cancellation.
I assume that the gobs of fine print in a typical contract also includes various obligations on the part of the service provider, and that among the many clauses is some sort of customer privacy protection.
So...what if a customer (who was prepared to forgo cell service for the cause) announced to his or her service provider that he/she was ceasing payment, effective immediately, because of reasonable cause that said service provider had violated privacy provisions, thereby voiding the service contract?
I'm presuming that the company would then demand payment.
Possession being 9/10 of the law, to get satisfaction the service provider would now have to bring action against the customer, not vice-versa.
Then the customer could make a case that the provider had not upheld its guarantee of privacy, as evidenced by the fact that the provider was party to the recently enacted immunity legislation.
Even as a layperson, I realize that the burden of proof would fall on the customer. But my question is: could they use their standing to force discovery? As a last resort, after Congress had granted immunity and abnegated its own power and responsibility to investigate the records in the first place?
Would it make any difference, in law or in practical effect, if a large group of customers announced the abrogation of their service contracts in one concerted action?
I'm sure it's weird at best. (Then again, these are desperate times--it's worth a long shot before going straight to armed rebellion!) But is it even legally conceivable?