The outcome of a high-pressure lobbying campaign (spearheaded by AT&T and Verizon senior executives) is a bill that will grant immunity to the TelCo's retroactively. (Or more accurately a portion of a bill having to do with the powers the national government has with regard to surveillance and spying.)
What do you think about all this? Kenneth Wainstein, the assistant attorney general for national security, calls this immunity "A matter of general fairness" and of course Verizon has said that their part in the surveillance was a first amendment right. Spokesmen for the Electronic Frontiers Foundation (EFF) say the opposite; without the risk of punishment, what is to stop the TelCo's from repeating this behavior in the future.
Check out the following Web pages for a summary of all this:
You are to write a one-page essay (max) on this question. This is a position-paper assignment. This means you are to take a position on this issue: grant immunity or let 'em hang, and then defend your position. Craft a compelling argument to support your position.
Since your essay and the conclusion you draw must be grounded in your research, you must provide a bibliography. For each entry in your bibliography you must provide a 1-2 sentence analysis as to the accuracy, authority, objectivity and coverage of the source. Your bibliography may be on a second page.
Your position paper/essay should have a firm ethical foundation: analogy, utilitarianism, deontological argument or the paramedic method.