FBI Drops "John Doe" Case; Librarians Say Publicity Was the Key

-- Library Journal, 6/27/2006

Last month, federal attorneys rescinded the gag order in the "John Doe" case, thus allowing four Connecticut librarians--officials of the Windsor-based Library Connection consortium--to identify themselves as recipients of an unspecified request for library records. On Monday, the librarians had even better news to announce: the case had been dropped entirely.

"There was an avalanche of publicity, most very complimentary to us,"

Library Connection VP Peter Chase told an early-morning crowd at the Morial Convention Center in New Orleans. "Clearly, things were not going for the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation] the way they hoped. We made it clear we were going back to court to fight." Moreover, in the next iteration of the court case, said Chase, director of the Plainville Public Library, "they would not be able to shuffle us off to a locked room," preventing the librarians from announcing their role in the case, as has happened at previous hearings. At one such hearing, the four were prevented from entering the courtroom together, sitting next to each other, making eye contact with their attorneys, or talking to them. "If they were to face us again, it would be face to face unmuzzled."

When Chase revealed that "the FBI has decided to withdraw completely from the case," the 100 or so librarians in attendance rose for a standing ovation. Commented George Christian, executive director of the Library Connection. "I don't think the FBI caved in on the merits of the case. They didn't like the spotlight." The National Security Letter (NSL) shows that the FBI was seeking all records associated with a particular computer in Hartford County; the NSL was dated May 19, 2005, but Library Connection did not receive the NSL until July 13, 2005. Still, many parts of the case record remain sealed, an issue that remains under negotiation between government attorneys and lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the librarians.Government officials told the New York Times that they used other tactics to investigate; the FBI said that "conducting that investigation was less efficient" because of the case, but "because the threat ultimately was without merit, that delay came at no cost other than slowing the pace of the investigation." "They're celebrating the fact they don't have to comply, and I don't think that's something that should be celebrated," said Kevin O'Connor, the United States attorney for Connecticut. "What are you celebrating? You're celebrating the fact that you prevented the government from investigating a potential terrorist threat."

As has been noted, government attorneys were sloppy in their redaction of the court record; the Library Connection name was revealed last September by the New York Times. Identifying information about Chase, the chair of the Connecticut Library Association's (CLA) Intellectual Freedom Committee, remained in the court record. He saluted Alice Knapp, CLA president, who substituted for him at several public forums, for not putting him on the spot when he withdrew for fear of inadvertently disclosing information about the court case. "She never said, 'Why can't you do it?'" He held up the poorly-redacted court document: "Who would you rather trust with your national security secrets?"

"While the government's real motives in this case have been questionable from the beginning, their decision to back down is a victory not just for librarians but for all Americans who value their privacy," said ACLU attorney Ann Beeson. Still, the librarians were unable to participate, as they had wished, in the debate over the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act. Janet Nocek, secretary of the Library Connection and director of the Portland Library, CT, noted that she had lost a friend on 9/11 and remains concerned about the dangers of terrorism. But the librarians' action in resisting an NSL, which, unlike a subpoena is not supervised by a court, "really was the right thing," she said. "I could have helped them [Congress] understand the issue."