The PATRIOT Act and Libraries

1. The PATRIOT Act and Libraries Abby A. Goodrum April 15th, 2005

2. “As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness.” Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas.

3. USA PATRIOT Act Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001

4. ALA Code of Ethics “The American Library Association Code of Ethics states the values to which we are committed, and embodies the ethical responsibilities of the profession in this changing information environment.” • III. We protect each library user’s right to privacy and confidentiality with respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted.

5. ALA Policy onConfidentiality of Library Records • “The Council of the American Library Association strongly recommends that the responsible officers of each library, cooperative system, and consortium in the United States: • 3. Resist the issuance of enforcement of any such process, order, or subpoena until such time as a proper showing of good cause has been made in a court of competent jurisdiction.

6. Birth of the Patriot Act • 342 pages long -- cobbled together hastily • signed into law on 26 October 2001 in response to terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 • Not reviewed by most who voted for it • Intended to alter provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to reduce restrictions on investigatory powers

7. Section 218 – FISA Warrants • Amends the Foreign Intelligence Security Act (FISA) so that foreign intelligence or terrorism need only be “a significant purpose” of the investigation, rather than “the purpose” for FISA court warrants.

8. Section 505National Security Letters • Authorizes the use of National Security Letters (NSL)(administrative subpoenas) for personal records • Probable cause not required • May be issued by FBI field offices • Do not require ANY court oversight

9. Sections 214 & 216 • Extend telephone monitoring laws to e-mail, IP addresses, and URLs • Authority provided by secret FISA court at standards lower than probable cause • Gag order applies

10. Section 215 • Allows warrants for “any tangible thing” including circulation records, computer hard drives, floppy discs, ILL records, etc. • Authority provided by secret FISA court at standards lower than probable cause • Lets agent seize an entire database when investigating a single individual • Gag order

11. Provisions Subject to Sunset Section 224 calls for several sections to expire on 31 December 2005 unless renewed by Congress including: • Section 218 • Section 214 • Section 215

12. DOJ Response: “The number of times section 215 has been used to date is zero.” CNN.com, September 17, 2003; CBSNews.com, September, 18, 2003.

13. Last week’s Senate Judiciary meeting…. GONZALES: “Let me repeat what I said earlier. This department and the government has no interest in the library reading habits of ordinary Americans.  We do believe, however, that libraries should not become safe havens for people who are here in this country and do want to do harm to other Americans. And we do have evidence of that happening, even though Section 215 has not been used in connection with library records.  We do know that There have been examples of terrorists who are using access to computers at libraries.”

14. ALA Study: Background • Prior Studies • Smaller • Limited to public or academic • Questions and responses somewhat limited • Importance of getting this type of data

15. Research Questions What impact, if any, have recent legislation and law enforcement practices had on general access to information, access to public information, access to government information, library record keeping, information security and filtering in libraries, attitudes and behavioral intentions of individuals in the user community, concerns for civil liberties, and relations of libraries with the law enforcement community?

16. Description of the Study • Researchers from Syracuse, Waterloo and Florida • Pilot project last year • developed and pre-tested questions • obtained feedback from DOJ and ALA legal • 2 web-based surveys • Notification by mail • Unstructured interviews • Sample size and selection • 4,221 Academic libraries • 1,536 Public libraries

17. Public Libraries

18. Academic Libraries • There are approximately 3,200 institutions of higher education, including community colleges, four-year colleges, and universities. • 2004 NCES IPEDS file = 4,200 entries • The study surveys all 4,200 institutions

19. Concerns “Individual responses to this survey will remain completely confidential. The data will only be discussed in aggregate form and no libraries that participate in this survey will be identified. The legal counsel of the American Library Association has approved this survey, and the questions DO NOT ask you for any information that violates any government laws or regulations in any way.”

20. Concerns continued… • What if I’ve had no law enforcement requests? • What if I think the PATRIOT Act is a good thing?

21. Progress to Date • Study has been running for 4 months • Responses from approximately 1,000 public and academic libraries so far…. • Interviews began in February -- approximately 50 completed so far….. • We need your help!

22. Every Voice Counts! Abby Goodrum: aagoodru@syr.edu agoodrum@watarts.uwaterloo.ca