ALA, Allied Organizations Ask Congress To Revise Patriot Act
Norman Oder -- Library Journal, 04/09/2009
- Urge library and bookstore records to be exempted from Section 215
- Obama administration position unclear
- Law must be revised this year
| Go back to the Academic Newswire for more stories |
In an effort to steer the Congressional debate, the American Library Association (ALA) and groups representing booksellers, publishers, and writers have asked Congress to exempt library and bookstore records from the provisions of Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, which is scheduled to be renewed this year.
The Campaign for Reader Privacy, which involves the ALA, American Booksellers Association, Association of American Publishers, and PEN American Center, notes that Republicans in the House of Representative have introduced legislation extending the provision at issue, and two others, for another decade. Also, FBI Director Robert Mueller, who was appointed to a ten-year term in 2001, has called on Congress to extend the three expiring provisions.
“It is too early to tell what the final word from the Obama Administration will be,” Lynne Bradley, deputy director of ALA’s Washington Office, told LJ. “To be proactive and prudent, the Coalition is making it clear we’re not letting this go away. We maintain there should be higher legal protections for First Amendment activities.”
In Congressional testimony in January, then-Attorney General nominee Eric Holder expressed qualified support for maintaining Section 215. Bradley said the timing of the revision is unclear, given various “speculations about whether this will happen very soon, or in the fall.”
Impact of Patriot Act
Since 2003, the Department of Justice has used its expanded power under the Patriot Act to issue more than 200 secret search orders under Section 215 and more than 190,000 National Security Letters (NSLs), the Campaign said, noting that, while recipients face a gag order, there have been at least three “significant and disturbing attempts to obtain records from libraries since 2003.”
Without Section 215, the government would be required to seek a grand jury subpoena—an additional safeguard—for such records. The Campaign also supports legislation that would narrow the use of Section 215 orders and NSLs to searches targeting suspected terrorists or people who are known to them.
The Campaign noted that “[o]pposition is likely to come from some elements of the FBI and the Department of Justice."
Alternatives
The Campaign’s statement offered an alternative: the use of grand jury subpoenas to seek bookstore and library records. While FBI agents told the Inspector General that such subpoenas cannot protect the secrecy of an investigation as effectively as the gag order that accompanies a Section 215 order or an NSL, the FBI has in fact used such subpoenas frequently because they are easier to obtain.
The use of secret grand jury information is entirely within the control of federal prosecutors, the Campaign noted. Moreover, while booksellers and librarians should have a right to reveal publicly that they have been subpoenaed, they wouldn’t disclose whose records are being sought because this would violate their commitment to privacy, the Campaign said.
Read more Newswire stories:
Penn Lands NEH Grant To Digitize Medieval, Renaissance Manuscripts
From the Bell Tower: Know Your Students—Before They Arrive
Dialog Announce Price Freeze; ProQuest Announces "Fee" Freeze; Lyrasis, FOKAL Deal
Changes To The LJ Academic Newswire
Bestsellers in Chemistry
