The Senate is currently debating controversial national security legislation that would, among many other things, grant immunity to companies that cooperated with the U.S. government's warrantless wiretap operations.

Maine's two senators should oppose the immunity provision. No one -- no person, no corporation, no government official -- should be above the law.

In 1991, the Maine Legislature stated that, "Telephone subscribers have a right to privacy and the protection of this right to privacy is of paramount concern to the State."

In the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, federal anti-terrorism efforts included warrantless wiretapping and data-mining of U.S. citizens' phone calls and emails, which many called a violation of constitutional privacy protections.

As a result of those activities, citizens initiated legal actions against Verizon and AT&T, which allegedly supplied the federal government with information about their customers' international telephone calls and e-mails.

In Maine, 22 customers filed a complaint against Verizon with the Public Utilities Commission, requesting a permanent cessation of warrantless surveillance. But that action -- along with actions filed in other states -- has yet to go anywhere because the federal government brought suit to prevent the lawsuits from proceeding, and the Maine PUC was ordered by federal court to temporarily abandon its investigation. The government's shutdown of the lawsuits was strongly protested by Maine Attorney General Steve Rowe, who said, "The people of Maine deserve to know whether or not Verizon shared their sensitive information with a federal government agency."

Now comes the Senate bill, which would render void the more than three dozen citizen complaints against telecommunications companies by granting the companies immunity for possible violations of their customers' privacy rights.

The measure is supported by the White House, Congressional Republicans and even some Democrats. Sen. Susan Collins has said that, "As a matter of fundamental fairness, companies that relied, in good faith, on the legal assurances of the Attorney General should not now be subjected to lawsuits based on the assistance they provide to our nation's intelligence efforts."

We disagree.

While it may be argued that the companies should not, ultimately, be subject to sanction for complying with a legal government request, there is no compelling argument that they -- or the government that asked for their assistance -- should be allowed to avoid a judicial process designed to investigate the legitimacy of those actions. That process has served this country well over two centuries by allowing citizens their day in court. To remove the actions of both the telecommunications companies and the government they serve from proper judicial review would harm the rights of American citizens and, ultimately, the Constitution that governs them.