This week, Congress will debate whether a temporary law that enhanced the Bush administration's power to conduct warrantless surveillance should be made permanent. What's especially controversial is that the new law would immunize cooperating telecommunications companies from prosecution.

Spurred by Jane Hamscher at Firedoglake bloggers are calling on Democratic presidential candiddate John Edwards to lead the charge against the measure, which is called the Profect America Act.

The bill was originally scheduled for debate in December but was tabled when Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) threatened to filibuster.

Edwards came out against the law last summer, when Congress passed it but set an expiration date of Feb. 1.

With that date rapidly approaching, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-UT) wants to extend the law for another 18 months, but Republican leaders are pushing to make it permanent.

Hamscher is calling on Edwards to demand that his Democratic rivals in the Senate vote against the measure. Her rallying cry says, in part:

John Edwards is the perfect person to lead with this message. Such an action would illustrate his genuine commitment to change and fighting vested interests in Washington, and hopefully it will channel that intense anti-immunity passion toward his campaign. He won't be able to participate in the filibuster himself, but by offering to leave the campaign trail and go back to DC with Clinton and Obama he'll be able to show leadership in challenging all Democrats to put thoughts of personal gain aside and join together in the fight to save the constitution.

Without the help of the presidential candidates, we are doomed to lose this fight. And all their calls for change will ring hollow if they allow George Bush to railroad this bill through a supine Democratic-controlled Senate because of their absence.

John Amato at Crooks and Liars reports that both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have said they will support a filibuster of the telecom-immunity proposal.

Saramerica certainly does:

In order to give the government the kind of authority it is asking for, the American people need to trust that authority will not be abused. FISA was first implemented after Watergate-era abuses of the Nixon administration -- and the oversight it contains is needed because throughout history, administration after administration has proved that such authority will be abused.

So does Jayne Lyn Stahl:

When an insidious measure which allows for warrantless eavesdropping on citizens' phone calls and emails, legislation ironically called the Protect America Act was scheduled to sunset, this fall, the Senate Intelligence Committee passed a measure which would require court review whenever an American citizen is targeted for surveillance anywhere in the world. The amended measure passed the Senate Intelligence Committee by a wide margin.

Importantly, though, the issue of immunity from prosecution for telecommunication behemoths, like AT&T, who broke privacy laws by turning over consumer information to the government was not addressed by the Senate Judiciary Committee. And, before any new FISA measure passes the Senate, we call upon Senate Majority Leader Reid to stand up to President Bush, and refuse to allow immunity to be written into any amendment to the Protect America Act.

More support for FDL's campaign here and here. The ACLU blog has more on the history of the debate.

What do you think? Should Edwards man the barricades on this one? If you agree with her, you can e-mail Edwards at john@edwards.com.