IT HAS TO BE DETERMINED TO BE LAWFUL. How do you determine electronic surveillance is lawful if it violates the 4th amendment rights of a collection of US citizens? Well, you can't and if you certified it was lawful, the court would review the certification upon their own initiative or at the request of the plaintiffs, to determine that the probable cause existed for the entire class of US citizen - plaintiffs - whose electronic communications were monitored. The AG has to prove that the citizens 1st and 4th amendment rights were not violated, along with the other standards as set out in the legislation.

THAT AIN'T IMMUNITY - as the provision is titled "statutory defenses", the defenses can be raised (as can any defense outlined in Rule 12 of the Civili Rules of Procedure, as can the defense of sovereign immunity, as can the defense of "state's secrets") but raising a defense alone does not absolve the telecoms from immunity, anymore than the certification of the AG to those defenses. The certification related to the defenses is subject to review, the court has to determine that the defenses are justified and protect the telecoms, thus the civil litigation lives on. Further, should the case be dismissed that dismissal is subject to further review upon appeal. They can't even hide behind "state's secrets" the court is entitled to all information to make a call and not all of it will be required to be provided in camera.

Like I said, there is NO BLANKET IMMUNITY.