Senators Weaken Proposed Patriot Act Reforms
Provision setting higher standard for library records remains; more negotiation next week
Norman Oder -- Library Journal, 10/02/2009
- Substitute bill marked up Thursday
- Section 215 has higher standard for library records
- ALA seeks reform of procedures regarding NSLs
While at a September 23 hearing Democratic Senators seemed to welcome adjustments in the USA PATRIOT Act, behind-the-scenes negotiations since then have weakened proposed reform provisions.
According to Lynne Bradley, director of the American Library Association’s (ALA) Office for Government Relations, before a mark-up yesterday of Patriot Act reauthorization legislation, a bill negotiated by Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) was substituted for Leahy’s USA PATRIOT Act Sunset Extension Act of 2009. (Leahy chairs the Judiciary Committee; Feinstein chairs the Intelligence Committee.)
The substitute bill weakened the reforms the library community has sought relevant to Section 215 and National Security Letters (NSLs), according to Bradley, who noted that it offers fewer reforms than Leahy’s original bill, which itself does not go as far as a reform bill proposed by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Russ Feingold (D-WI).
As noted by Wired News, the Leahy-Feinstein amendment—reversing Leahy’s previous position—does not require that the government show that the information sought under a Section 215 warrant is connected to suspected terrorism, just that it pertains to an “authorized investigation.”
A nod to libraries
However, the Leahy-Feinstein substitute does set a higher standard when library records are sought, noting that they must be “relevant to an authorized investigation… to obtain foreign intelligence information.”
While Bradley acknowledged to LJ that the language seems positive, she pointed out that the situation is fluid and the content of the bill is still being worked on.
The provision, she said, doesn’t deal with the larger issue of reader privacy emphasized by ALA and other organizations in the Coalition for Reader Privacy.
Also, she noted, records are sought more often via NSLs than Section 215, and the provision doesn’t address NSLs: “We want a higher legal standard to obtain NSLs, a limitation on the type and amount of information that can be collected, reasonable policies about appeal of the order and the gag order, and some changes as to how this personal information is retained by the federal government.”
Going forward
She said another mark-up is expected next Thursday in Judiciary Committee.
“This is a critical time for grassroots pressure to keep needed reforms in the bill,” Bradley wrote on the ALA’s District Dispatch blog.” As we continue to closely monitor this complex and highly fluid process closely, we call upon advocates to continue contacting their Senators.”
