FBI Won't Publicly Disclose Number of NSLs Used at Libraries
-- Library Journal, 4/3/2007
While the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has been quite willing to announce that it has not used Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act to seek records from libraries, the FBI has balked at public disclosure of its use of National Security Letters (NSLs), another method to gain such records and the one that American Library Association officials consider a more likely avenue. The issue came up at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing March 27 regarding oversight of the FBI, notably the findings by the Department of Justice Inspector General that the FBI, in pursuit of some NSLs (though not necessarily library ones), had sought personal data without proper authorization and improperly obtained telephone records. (Here's more on the hearing.)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the committee chairman grilled FBI Director Robert Mueller, about the use of NSLs, citing the 2005 effort to gain records from the Library Connection consortium in Windsor, CT, calling it "Kafka at the extreme." (The effort was ultimately dropped.) While Mueller said he didn't know how many times NSLs had been used at libraries, he said he'd get the answer by the end of the week. Apparently, the FBI did provide a number, but a Leahy staffer told LJ that the answer was classified and thus could not be publicly shared.
The colloquy below begins shortly past the eight-minute mark of this podcast.
PL: We were talking about the ability to obtain library records under the Patriot Act. That gives me some concern, and I'll tell you why. In 2005, FBI issued NSLs to four Windsor, CT, librarians. Here's what they asked them to do: surrender all subscriber information, billing information, and access logs of any person related to a specific library computer during a specific time period, according to press reports. But then, the NSL also prohibited the librarians from disclosing the fact that they received the NSL or its contents, the so-called gag order of the Patriot Act.
So what you have is, if someone sees a real abuse of an NSL—it's like saying, let's check the records of everybody who showed up at this hearing today, every citizen who showed up, every member of the press or anybody else, but let's not tell anyone we've done it. If there's abuses, the very people who could uncover those abuses had been gagged, told they can't say what's going on. This is Kafka at the extreme.
Two questions: Did the FBI abuse its authority in this Connecticut case? And how many times did FBI issue NSLs to libraries or educational institutions to date?
RM: The Patriot Act was changed in the most recent iteration, to provide an opportunity for somebody to contest portions of--
PL: --In this case, did the FBI abuse its authority?
RM: I do not believe so.
PL: How many times have you issued NSLs to libraries or educational institutions to date?
RM: I cannot think of one, but I'll have to go back and check.
PL: Was this Connecticut library the only one?
RM: I will have to go back and check
PL: Can we get that answer by the end of the week?
RM: Yes. May I also say, Mr. Chairman, that there was a report on our use of 215 of the Patriot Act that was issued by the Inspector General on the same day he issued the report with regard to our use of National Security Letters. That report found no abuse, and appropriate use of the 215 authority. It did not get much press; it did not get much attention. But it also discusses our use of Section 215 with regard to libraries. But again, I reiterate, that report that came out the same day as the report on NSLs found our appropriate utility of Section 215 of the Patriot Act.
