Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

ACLU 1, Patriot Act 0

Posted by Jeralyn Merritt at 7:11 AM on September 7, 2007.


Jeralyn Merritt: National Security letters are not just used to get records of suspected terrorists and they have a tremendous potential for abuse.

This post, written by Jeralyn Merritt, originally appeared on FireDogLake

A federal judge in New York today struck a fatal blow to the Patriot Act provision authorizing national security letters. The ACLU, which brought the lawsuit, reports:

The law has permitted the FBI to issue NSLs demanding private information about people within the United States without court approval, and to gag those who receive NSLs from discussing them. The court found that the gag power was unconstitutional and that because the statute prevented courts from engaging in meaningful judicial review of gags, it violated the First Amendment and the principle of separation of powers.

The case is Doe v. Gonzales and the 106 page opinion is available here (pdf). You can see a copy of a national security letter here (pdf).

This is an important decision. National Security letters are not just used to get records of suspected terrorists and they have a tremendous potential for abuse.

NSLs may be used to obtain access to subscriber, billing or transactional records from Internet service providers; to obtain a wide array of financial and credit documents; or even to obtain library records. In almost all cases, recipients of NSLs are forbidden, or "gagged," from disclosing that they have received the letters, even to close family and friends. This has been a severe hardship on NSL recipients, who not only have been forced to keep this major event secret, but who have been prevented from meaningfully participating in public discussions about NSLs. The court today held that because the gag provisions cannot be separated from the entire amended statute, the court was compelled to strike down the entire statute.

In other words, since the individual receiving the request for records is "gagged," i.e., not permitted to disclose receipt of the letter, he or she can't challenge it, even in a court of law. That results in no judicial oversight.

"Without oversight, there is nothing to stop the government from engaging in broad fishing expeditions, or targeting people for the wrong reasons, and then gagging Americans from ever speaking out against potential abuses of this intrusive surveillance power."

In 2005, Barton Gellman of the Washington Post wrote a terrific article on National Security Letters.

I'll quote just a few paragraphs to answer the questions, What's a national security letter? What oversight is there? What kinds of information does it demand? Aren't they just used to nab terrorists?

Issued by FBI field supervisors, national security letters do not need the imprimatur of a prosecutor, grand jury or judge. They receive no review after the fact by the Justice Department or Congress. The executive branch maintains only statistics, which are incomplete and confined to classified reports. The Bush administration defeated legislation and a lawsuit to require a public accounting, and has offered no example in which the use of a national security letter helped disrupt a terrorist plot.

....The records it gathers describe where a person makes and spends money, with whom he lives and lived before, how much he gambles, what he buys online, what he pawns and borrows, where he travels, how he invests, what he searches for and reads on the Web, and who telephones or e-mails him at home and at work.

The letters do not just collect records of suspected terrorists. Since the Patriot Act was enacted, they can get your records or mine fairly easily.

Under the old legal test, the FBI had to have "specific and articulable" reasons to believe the records it gathered in secret belonged to a terrorist or a spy. Now the bureau needs only to certify that the records are "sought for" or "relevant to" an investigation "to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities." That standard enables investigators to look for conspirators by sifting the records of nearly anyone who crosses a suspect's path.

Gellman reported that the FBI had increased the number of national security letters it issued by one hundred fold, to 30,000 letters a year. A March 2007 report by the Justice Department's Office of Inspector General found that number to be a vast understatement -- the actual number of data requests between 2003 and 2005 was 143,000. The OIG report also found 3,000 violations by the FBI.

For much more on national security letters, EPIC has a webpage devoted to them. Another interesting read is this anonymous letter from the recipient of a national security letter published in the Washington Post.

The Government surely will appeal Judge Marrero's ruling to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. In the meantime, let's all savor the victory.

Digg!

Jeralyn Merritt is criminal defense attorney in Denver representing persons accused of serious federal and state offenses.


Hillary vs. Obama: Who is Trying Harder to be "Tough on Crime"?
Hint: Neither is particularly progressive
February 11, 2008.
Cashing in on the Prison Boom
While small towns become dependent on mass incarceration, corporations reap the benefits
January 28, 2008.
Crack Cocaine Sentence Reductions Finally Begin
Jeralyn Merritt: The 100 to 1 ratio between powder and crack cocaine penalties has no rationale or scientific basis.
November 1, 2007.
Rudy's Buddy Bernie Kerik Likely to Face Bribery, Tax Fraud and Obstruction of Justice Charges
Jeralyn Merritt: The big question is how this will affect Rudy Giuliani's presidential bid.
October 12, 2007.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
ONE SMALL STEP FOR THE PEOPLE
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Sep 7, 2007 7:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's all starting to come together. Little by little we'll get back our country. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Now that the cockroach's "Little Trained Monkey" is gone...
Posted by: ~Fiona~ on Sep 7, 2007 9:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...Judges are finally beginning to Act Like Judges again... With "Gonzo and his Goons" (who changed, or over ruled every law put in place to prevent these atrosities) gone, it seems the judges are taking steps to take back our country at long last...

Now, I can't wait til they start locking these criminals up and putting them on trial for treason and war crimes...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

sparrow
Posted by: sparrow on Sep 7, 2007 9:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's encouraging news, but as far as I'm concerned, not yet the time to pop the corks. Rest assured that Bush will appeal and perhaps along the way get a little help from Congress again if only he recites "terror, 9-11, terrorists, 9-11, terror, and 9-11" again repeatedly. And why not? He has always been able to rely on the Republicans to go along wholeheartedly, and the Democats have thus far provided little in real opposition to really make me think otherwise.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

what a joke
Posted by: kelt65 on Sep 7, 2007 10:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
what difference does it make if you can be held without trial?

they can rule it as illegal as they want, habeas corpus is no more and the judicial system is a mere joke.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: what a joke Posted by: kelt65
NSL doesn't open
Posted by: left nut on Sep 7, 2007 10:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would like to see the sample NSL. It doesn't open. The brief PDF does. What's up? I hope it's an error on AlterNet's part or my part and not our firends at "Homeland Security" deciding what's too top secret for us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

State of the Security State
Posted by: eddie torres on Sep 7, 2007 1:10 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
250,000 Homelanders under random and chaotic supervision tracking 20,000 US-based evildoers at $50 billion per year.

Are terrrist cells who try to blow up their shoes really that adept at evading all this super-duper internal security? Or are a bunch of Red State clowns serving the Kleptofascist Yachtocracy taking the US Treasury for a ride?

Scare more / steal more:

1) The Pentagon and the CIA earlier this year announced that they had been using letters similar the the FBI's NSLs - except the Pentagon/CIA letters were "voluntary".

2) The Preznit issued a signing statement that exempted "himself" (i.e. executive branch leadership) from NSL and other Patriot Act I reporting requirements.

3) DOJ Inspector General Glenn Fine's 126-page unclassified audit on FBI Patriot Act / NSL abuse found that 143,000 NSL letters were "improperly issued about 16 percent of the time" and "the FBI did not establish basic training and record-keeping procedures to ensure that civil liberties were protected."

4) Emergency records orders (called "Exigent Circumstance Letters" or ECLs) were issued for thousands of US telephone records but contained false statements and failed to adequately protect privacy of innocent individuals; a follow-up FBI audit in June found at least 1,000 legal or regulatory violations with ECLs.

5) The DHS' $50 million ADVISE data mining experiment was canceled after records were illegally sucked into ADVISE, including: the TSA no-fly list, 3.6 million shipping records, lists of people crossing the US-Canadian border, and lists of foreign exchange students.

6) ABC polls a grand total of 1,125 senior citizens and comes up with this gem: "Surveillance Cameras Win Broad Support". Subtitle: "Majority of Americans Favor Extra Safety Factor of Cameras." NPR and IHT get in on the spin-and-dance for the wiretappers: "In US, Calls Grow for UK-Style Security Cameras", "US Eyes UK's Surveillance Cameras", and "Manhattan takes cue from London's 'Ring of Steel'".

7) The Terrrist Screening Center (TSC) uses 100+ agents (and $100 million) from multiple agencies to cross-check the 500,000 names on the "terrrist watch list" with domestic law enforcement or intelligence agency reports, and in 2006 tracked 20,000 positive matches against the list. This did not result in 20,000 prosecutions for terrrist activities.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Corruption Claims Another Victim
Posted by: ~Fiona~ on Sep 8, 2007 8:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Chuck Hagel, one of the few brave enough to speak out from within the completely corrupt rethuglican party has announced he will resign following this term and will not seek further involvement.

Yet another victim to the ruthlessness of absolute corruption that has stolen our democracy.

A sad, sad loss.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lawlessness
Posted by: JAVA on Sep 8, 2007 9:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are children allowed to know abou the NSLs? Because it's no secret who has them among children in Atlanta, GA.

Anyway, what are these companies suppose to think about these people who are being spied on? When they get these letters or orders are they automatically convinced that some person that they have never met is some kind of criminal or evil person? Isn't this just creating the image of there being an issue when there may have never been a real problem to begin with. Now there is the suspicion that these people have done something wrong. When in fact, up until that moment they've been living normal lives just like every one else. Another thing, who decides this list of people to pursue? Is it the people out there that are pissed off at their neighbors and knows someone to call to turn in these so called "Suspected" individuals in? Someone whose boyfriend is a police officer? Someone who didn't sleep with some powerful man in politics or the military officer? Are these letters really secret? Can these supposed investigations be made public? If they are then why? To destroy some hapless person out there whose done nothing but work hard other than piss off the wrong person?
Or is this another rise of Adolph Hitler under "[The] Political Awakening."

Is this the Nazi regime putting into practice modern day racial policies that are aimed to "purify" and strengthen the [American] "Aryan" population?

ARE WE IN FACT TURNING IN THE JEWS THAT ARE LIVING NEXT DOOR?

Who are the [Jews]; are they the people who speak of democracy and peace?

Should we be afraid to speak our opinions about politics in our own homes?
Lets catch the real criminals. Not Grandma's out there chatting with the Grandkids.

Another thing, whose to say that these people receiving these letters are up standing? So here we are spying and handing out letters to people that could be real criminals. Imagine someone with very low ethics or morals receiving these so call NSLs. Now we have people who have permission to steal money from these blind and deaf individuals don't even know why they're suddenly having issues. Why not have apartments rigged with cameras. We could really have people spying on renters in their bathrooms. It could become a game of sorts, for example, mind games and harassment to total strangers. It's okay if everybody knows what’s going on but the "Suspect." Now we have average Americans who are experiencing what they know is illegal activity but have no one to answer their call for help. The result is absolute lawlessness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You would believe.....
Posted by: JAVA on Sep 8, 2007 10:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Patriot Act doesn't say anything about it being legal to use the NSLs to watch people get out of their bath tubs with a camera or share these images as wel as "Suspected Individuals" personal information with children. This is being done in Georgia.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ACLU deserves credit
Posted by: Schroeder on Sep 9, 2007 9:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I intend to take some of the money I've been donating to the Catholic Church and donate it to the ACLU. I appreciate that in this time of no support for our rights from the government, at least the ACLU have been doing what they can to stop the corrosion of our freedoms.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]