(4 of 4)
In part because so little is known about the phone-call collection program, experts say they aren't entirely sure whether it is legal. The consensus seems to be that it probably does not violate the Fourth Amendment ban on illegal search and seizure, but it may run afoul of several statutes governing the privacy of telephone records. The three companies that turned over their customers' records--AT&T, BellSouth and Verizon, which combined carry roughly 80% of the nation's landline calls and half the wireless ones--all issued terse statements saying they valued their customers' privacy and did nothing illegal. "We get requests and subpoenas for records from cheating husbands and wives to sheriffs to the FBI down in Miami wanting a wiretap," Jeff Battcher, BellSouth's vice president of corporate communications, told TIME. "We know how to do this, and we would never give out any confidential customer information without having a subpoena or a write-off from a judge."
A fourth firm, Qwest, refused the government's request for its records, despite what USA Today reported was heavy pressure by the NSA, including a suggestion that Qwest might not get future classified work with the government. In a written statement, the attorney for former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio said Nacchio believed that "these requests violated the privacy requirements of the Telecommunications Act."
Bush was forceful in asserting what the newly revealed data-mining program isn't doing. "We're not mining or trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans," he insisted. "Our efforts are focused on links to al-Qaeda terrorists and its affiliates." But no one in his Administration was willing to shed any light on how it is using the information it is getting or what the value of the whole exercise has been. White House officials hint that only long-distance calls, not local ones, are in the database, but they won't go much further. Even some of the President's friends say they need more answers. Asks Grover Norquist, a G.O.P. activist and an important White House ally: "The question for the government is, What was the point of this? What did this do for us? What is it good for?"
Given the President's expansive view of his powers in fighting terrorism, the revelation has only fueled speculation as to what else the government may be doing. Attorney General Gonzales hinted in early April that the President may even have the power to order wiretaps on purely domestic phone calls without court approval. "I'm not going to rule it out," he told the House Judiciary Committee. Says Dale Carpenter, a constitutional-law expert at the University of Minnesota: "If the Administration claims literally bottomless Executive power to defend the country--and it has--then I think we can expect that there are many such secret programs out there that we haven't yet learned about and that members of Congress may not even know about." But as Bush's pick to head the CIA prepares for his Senate confirmation hearing this week, General Hayden can be certain they will be asking.