18 U.S.C. § 2522 — Enforcement of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act

submitted 32 years ago by Pub. L. 103-414 to r/title-18-CRIMES-AND-CRIMINAL-PROCEDURE · 364 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

A court can order a telecommunications carrier to fix a compliance failure right away. The Attorney General can also sue in federal court to force compliance. Courts may fine violators up to $10,000 per day for continued violations.

(a) This subsection applies to a court that issued a wiretap order. It also applies to a court that authorized a pen register or trap-and-trace device. The order can come from this chapter, a state statute, or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The pen register authority can come from chapter 206 or a state statute. If that court finds a telecommunications carrier failed to follow the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, it can act. The court may order the carrier to comply right away. The court may also order a company that supports the carrier to help. It may order the maker of the carrier's switching equipment to provide needed changes too.

(b) The Attorney General has a separate way to enforce this law. The Attorney General may file a civil lawsuit in a federal district court. The lawsuit can seek an order requiring a telecommunications carrier, an equipment manufacturer, or a support-services provider to comply with the Act.

(c) A court that issues an order under this section can also impose a civil penalty. The penalty can be up to $10,000 per day for each day the violation continues after the order. In deciding whether to impose a penalty, and how much, the court must weigh several things. These include the nature, circumstances, and extent of the violation. They also include the violator's ability to pay, its good-faith efforts to comply, and any effect on its ability to stay in business. The court also considers how much blame the violator bears and how long it delayed before trying to comply. The court may weigh any other matters that justice requires.

(d) Terms used in this section have the same meaning given to them in section 102 of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act.

facts

- Codified at 18 U.S.C. § 2522, titled "Enforcement of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act." - Added by Pub. L. 103–414, title II, § 201(a), enacted October 25, 1994 (108 Stat. 4289). - Comprises 364 words across four subsections (a)–(d). - Source-credit reflects a single legislative reference (one enacting law, no subsequent amendments listed beyond the original addition).

the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain

(a)Enforcement by Court Issuing Surveillance Order.—

If a court authorizing an interception under this chapter, a State statute, or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) or authorizing use of a pen register or a trap and trace device under chapter 206 or a State statute finds that a telecommunications carrier has failed to comply with the requirements of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, the court may, in accordance with section 108 of such Act, direct that the carrier comply forthwith and may direct that a provider of support services to the carrier or the manufacturer of the carrier’s transmission or switching equipment furnish forthwith modifications necessary for the carrier to comply.

(b)Enforcement Upon Application by Attorney General.—

The Attorney General may, in a civil action in the appropriate United States district court, obtain an order, in accordance with section 108 of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, directing that a telecommunications carrier, a manufacturer of telecommunications transmission or switching equipment, or a provider of telecommunications support services comply with such Act.

(c)Civil Penalty.—

(1)In general.—

A court issuing an order under this section against a telecommunications carrier, a manufacturer of telecommunications transmission or switching equipment, or a provider of telecommunications support services may impose a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day for each day in violation after the issuance of the order or after such future date as the court may specify.

(2)Considerations.—

In determining whether to impose a civil penalty and in determining its amount, the court shall take into account—

(A)

the nature, circumstances, and extent of the violation;

(B)

the violator’s ability to pay, the violator’s good faith efforts to comply in a timely manner, any effect on the violator’s ability to continue to do business, the degree of culpability, and the length of any delay in undertaking efforts to comply; and

(C)

such other matters as justice may require.

(d)Definitions.—

As used in this section, the terms defined in section 102 of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act have the meanings provided, respectively, in such section.

Source credit: (Added Pub. L. 103–414, title II, § 201(a), Oct. 25, 1994, 108 Stat. 4289.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit

1994Enacted · Pub. L. 103-414 · 108 Stat. 4289

The record shows that 18 U.S.C. § 2522 was added by Public Law 103-414, title II, § 201(a), enacted October 25, 1994, and codified at 108 Stat. 4289. The source credit reflects no subsequent amendments to the section's text since its original enactment. Historical context: Public Law 103-414 is commonly known as the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA). The Act is generally understood to have been enacted in response to concerns raised by law enforcement agencies, particularly the Federal Bureau of Investigation, that emerging digital telecommunications technologies—including digital switching, cellular networks, and other advances—were making it increasingly difficult to execute lawfully authorized electronic surveillance. The commonly cited purpose of CALEA was to require telecommunications carriers to design their systems with built-in capabilities to assist law enforcement in conducting court-authorized interceptions, thereby preserving the government's surveillance capabilities amid rapid technological change. Section 2522 specifically appears to serve as the enforcement mechanism for CALEA's substantive requirements, authorizing courts and the Attorney General to compel compliance and to impose civil penalties. However, the record does not establish the specific legislative deliberations, debates, or particularized concerns that led Congress to structure this enforcement provision in this precise manner, including the selection of the $10,000 daily penalty figure or the specific factors enumerated for judicial consideration.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

no arguments yet — make the first case