Watching the Detectives

That left-wing rag The Washington Times headlines a story thus:

Librarians dispute Justice's claim on use of Patriot Act

Audrey Hudson reports:

…the [Justice] department said the Patriot Act has been used "zero" times for investigative purposes.

Former Assistant Attorney General Viet Dinh told the House Judiciary Committee in May that libraries had been contacted approximately 50 times in 2002 using the Patriot Act. Mr. Dinh, the chief architect of the Patriot Act, resigned one week before that testimony and put the number of libraries contacted at "fewer than 50."

The Library Research Center at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign conducted a poll last year of more than 1,500 libraries. Sixty libraries said that federal agents had requested information on patrons under the Patriot Act, and nearly 15 percent of the librarians said they turned the information over without demanding a court order.

[Link via Free-Market.net]

Comments

[Julian Sanchez]

Search Google news man, that claim was all over the news all weekend.

[Eric Lindholm]

An Elvis Costello reference - cool!

[Ayatollah Usoe]

I've asked my library if they would accept a co-signed library card. Just as one can co-sign on a loan, it would allow people to vouch for others, or to use pseudonym names, and the library card is then issued to the signer, with the value of the books guaranteed by the co-signer. (I'm sure they do this with children!)

Justice would have to investigate two people, and would have no way of attributing the book to either one.

I'd love to have a library card that read "Ayatollah Usoe."

[Mark]

According to the Associated Press, the "zero" quote comes from a memo from Ashcroft to FBI Director Robert Mueller. Full AP story from Sept. 18 is below. But here's the relevant quote:

"I know you share my concern that the public not be misled regarding the manner in which the U.S. Department of Justice, and the FBI in particular, have been utilizing the authorities provided" in the law, Ashcroft wrote to Mueller.

"The number of times section 215 has been used to date is zero," Ashcroft wrote.

Here's the story:

Ashcroft: Patriot Act fears are not reality

By Curt Anderson, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (Sept. 18, 2003) - Attorney General John Ashcroft said Wednesday the FBI has not sought a single record from a library or business under a part of the Patriot Act widely criticized as opening Americans' reading habits or personal information to undue government scrutiny.

In a memo to FBI Director Robert Mueller obtained by The Associated Press, Ashcroft said he decided to disclose the previously classified information to "counter the troubling amount of public distortion and misinformation" surrounding section 215 of the anti-terrorism law.

"I know you share my concern that the public not be misled regarding the manner in which the U.S. Department of Justice, and the FBI in particular, have been utilizing the authorities provided" in the law, Ashcroft wrote to Mueller.

"The number of times section 215 has been used to date is zero," Ashcroft wrote.

The decision, first revealed by Ashcroft in a telephone call earlier Wednesday to the president of the American Library Association, Carla Hayden of Baltimore, removes a veil of secrecy surrounding one of the most contentious provisions of the law passed a few weeks after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

"We're very gratified that the American public is now going to know what is happening in public libraries," said Emily Sheketoff, executive director of the library association's Washington office. "This has given people pause, a sense of concern."

Critics have said the FBI's authority to obtain the records threatens the privacy and First Amendment rights of library and bookstore patrons, as well as other businesses. Law enforcement officials say the power is rarely used, properly supervised by judges and essential to combat terror.

In his memo to Mueller, Ashcroft noted that all members of Congress have had access to the formerly secret information about use of the section 215 authority in the Patriot Act. Yet many continued to criticize the law, with some libraries even posting signs warning patrons that the FBI might check into their reading habits and others destroying records more frequently.

The American Civil Liberties Union and critical members of Congress said Ashcroft is taking a positive step by declassifying the FBI records. But they said the potential remains for the law to be abused.

"I hope that this decision indicates a new willingness to address public concerns about the Patriot Act in a forthright and honest manner, rather than ridiculing those who believe the law may not adequately protect our citizens' constitutional freedoms," said Sen. Russell Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat who cast the only Senate vote against the Patriot Act.

Ashcroft's move follows a pair of speeches he delivered this week in which he denounced as "baseless hysteria" claims by the ACLU, library association and others that the Patriot Act allows the FBI to snoop unchecked into Americans' reading habits.

"The hysteria is ridiculous. Our job is not," Ashcroft said in those speeches.

Laura Murphy, director of the ACLU's Washington office, said Ashcroft's declassification decision appeared to be mostly public relations aimed at tackling the fallout from those speeches.

"Is this the beginning of the Justice Department being more accountable, or is this just a bone to throw to the librarians?" Murphy said. "I think the American people can see through that."

Ashcroft recently completed a 16-city tour to defend the Patriot Act as an essential part of the fight against terrorism. Just last week, President Bush asked Congress to approve new legal tools to combat terror, including expansion of a type of subpoena that does not require approval by a judge or grand jury.

Rep. Bernie Sanders, who is sponsoring legislation to exempt libraries and bookstores from the Patriot Act, said there is momentum in Congress to scale back the law. The Republican-controlled House recently voted against "sneak and peek" searches that allow for delay of notification of the target.

"The bottom line is not so much what may or may not have been done in the past, but what might be done in the future," said Sanders, I-Vt.

Section 215 of the Patriot Act does not specifically mention libraries or bookstores. But it permits the FBI to obtain secret warrants in foreign terrorism or intelligence investigations for "books, records, papers, documents and other items" from all types of businesses or other organizations.

Such warrants must be approved by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees investigations of individuals or groups in the United States believed to be foreign terrorists or spies. The individual who receives the subpoena is barred from disclosing that fact.

[Plutarck]

...

...

...HAHAHAHAHHA!

Now let's see if the press runs with it 😀

[nm156]

Don't get cute, Nick. Still, Elvis C. beats the Kinks.

[Thorley Winston]

...the [Justice] department said the Patriot Act has been used "zero" times for investigative purposes.

What?s the full quote and its context? I?m suspicious of any quote when only one word is actually directly attributable to the subject.

[Kevin Carson]

This is hardly surprising, unless you trust authoritarian nutjobs like Ass-crap to give a truthful account of how many people's rights they've violated.

[Steve]

Wait, the government is lying to us?

[Steve]

The JD's claim about "zero" uses applies only to Section 215 and its overly broad language granting the feds access to "any tangible thing" (which can include library records, medical records, etc.) they can convince the rubber-stamp intelligence court might be useful in a terrorist investigation. That section also prohibits those asked to provide such information from telling anyone about it.

The claim of "zero" uses was intended to make the ALA, ACLU, and other critics look like Chicken Little, but it looks to me like it backfired a bit.

[Thorley Winston]

So I take it then that nobody has an actual full quote that we can refer to in order to see if this is what the DoJ actually said?

[Wesley Mouch-Crusher]

Ashcroft & co. basically say that we absolutely need all the provisions of the "U SAP AT RIOT" Act, but we need not be afraid because it doesn't let them do anything they couldn't before.