The judge presiding over the case, US District Judge Vaughn Walker of San Francisco, announced late Monday he wanted to discuss法官主持的情況下，美國地方法院法官沃恩沃克在舊金山宣布，週一尾盤，他希望討論 11 questions 11個問題 (.pdf) at Tuesday’s hearing, one of which goes directly to the heart of the immunity legislation. （ 。 PDF格式）在週二舉行的聽證會，其中直接用於核心的豁免權的立法。

“Is there any precedent for this type of enactment that is analogous in all of these respects: retroactivity; immunity for constitutional violations; and delegation of broad discretion to the executive branch to determine whether to invoke the provision?,” the judge asked. “是否有任何先例這種類型的頒布是類似於在所有這些方面：既往;豁免權憲法的行為;和代表團的廣泛的自由裁量權的行政部門，以確定是否援引的規定？ ， ”法官問。

Carl Tobias, a professor at the University of Richmond School of Law, says the immunity legislation, if upheld, “makes it possible to extend immunity to other areas of the law.”卡爾拜厄斯教授在里士滿大學法學院說，立法的豁免權，如果維持原判， “使我們能夠延長豁免權的其他法律領域。 ”

He agreed, for example, that it would not be far-fetched to imagine Congress immunizing ExxonMobil for the 1989 Valdez oil spill “for national security reasons.” A jury awarded about $5 billion in punitive damages in that case, an amount the courts reduced to $500 million.他同意，例如，它不會牽強附會想像國會免疫埃克森美孚公司的1989年石油洩漏巴爾德斯“對國家安全的原因。 ”陪審團裁定約50億美元的懲罰性賠償在這種情況下，這一數額減少法院5億美元。

In the telecom immunity challenge, the government argues that the telecoms should not be punished, or suffer the threat of punishment, for a surveillance program that the Bush administration claims was designed only to fight terrorism.在電信豁免權的挑戰，政府認為，電信不應該受到懲罰，或受到威脅的懲罰，為監視計劃，布什政府索賠只是為了打擊恐怖主義。 The government also denies the lawsuits’ allegations that the surveillance was a broad dragnet that sucked down Americans’ communications on a wholesale basis.政府還否認了訴訟，指控監視著廣泛的天羅地網的吸了美國人的通訊批發的基礎。

The administration also says the immunity is warranted because the lawsuits threaten to expose government secrets.布什政府還表示，豁免權是必要，因為訴訟威脅，揭露政府機密。

The EFF brought the original spying lawsuit in 2006 against AT&T, and has since been joined by dozens of others targeting the nation’s telecommunications companies.該基金會的原始提請訴訟間諜在2006年對AT ＆ T公司，並已加入了幾十人針對國家的電信公司。

The EFF’s case, which has been consolidated with the others in the US District Court of San Francisco, includes so-called whistle-blower documents from a former AT&T technician.該基金會的情況，這已經得到鞏固與其他在美國聯邦地方法院的舊金山，包括所謂的舉報人從一個文件前AT ＆ T技術員。 The EFF claims the documents describe a secret room in an AT&T building in San Francisco that is wired to share raw internet traffic with the NSA.該基金會要求的文件描述了密室的AT ＆ T的建設在舊金山這是有線共享互聯網流量原料與消極安全保證。

The government sought to dismiss the original EFF case, and others that followed, on the grounds that they threatened to expose state secrets.政府要求撤銷原來的貸款情況下，和其他人之後，理由是他們威脅要揭露國家機密。 Judge Walker has ruled against the government, saying the case could proceed.沃克法官裁定對政府說，可能的情況下進行。

The government appealed.政府提出上訴。 But before the appeal was decided, Congress on July 9 gave the president the power to grant immunity to the carriers.但在此之前的上訴決定，國會在7月9日給布什總統的權力授予豁免權的運營商。

The那個 EFF基金會 is now現在是 challenging the immunity legislation富有挑戰性的豁免權的立法 on the grounds that it seeks to circumvent the Constitution’s separation of powers clause, as well as Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.的理由是，它試圖繞過憲法的權力分立的條款，以及美國的第四修正案權利，防止不合理的搜查和扣押。

“The legislation is an attempt to give the president the authority to terminate claims that the president has violated the people’s Fourth Amendment rights,” the EFF’s Cohn says. “立法是企圖給總統的權力，終止債權，總統違反了人民群眾的第四條修正案的權利， ”該基金會的科恩說。 “You can’t do that.” “你不能這樣做。 ”

Two weeks ago, the administration told Walker in a兩個星期前，布什政府對沃克在 court filing法庭文件 (.pdf) that the immunity legislation “represents the considered judgment of our nation’s political branches that, in the unique historical circumstances following the 9/11 attacks, telecommunications companies should not bear the burden of defending against claims that those companies assisted the government in its efforts to detect and prevent further terrorist attacks.” （ 。 PDF格式）的豁免權的立法“代表了深思熟慮的判斷我們國家的政治分支，在獨特的歷史情況後， 9 / 11恐怖襲擊，電信公司不應該承擔抵禦聲稱，這些公司協助政府在努力發現和防止更多的恐怖襲擊。 “

Congress, the government continued, “concluded that those companies should not face further litigation if they provided such assistance pursuant to a court order or a written certification, directive or request from a senior government official, or did not provide the alleged assistance.”國會，政府繼續說， “得出結論認為，這些公司不應將面臨進一步的訴訟，如果他們提供的這種援助根據法院的命令或書面證明，指令或要求政府高級官員，或沒有提供所謂的援助。 ”

The immunity law allows the government to file a classified brief with Judge Walker activating immunity for a particular communication company.豁免權法允許政府一份機密文件與法官介紹沃克激活免疫針對特定通訊公司。 Walker then has little power to deny the request, unless the judge finds the immunity legislation is itself unconstitutional.沃克則幾乎沒有權力拒絕這一要求，除非法官認為，豁免權的立法本身就是違憲。

Oral arguments in Walker’s courtroom are scheduled for 10 am PST on Tuesday.口頭辯論沃克的審判定於太平洋標準時間上午10時星期二。 Threat Level will cover the proceedings live威脅級別將涉及訴訟活 . 。