Court Strikes Down Gag Rule for National Security Letters
Court Strikes Down Gag Rule for National Security Letters
Yesterday, in a well-reasoned decision, a federal judge in New York struck down under the First Amendment a particularly extreme provision in the Patriot Act — the “gag rule” that applied to National Security Letters (NSLs). As discussed in my Senate Judiciary testimony this April, NSLs are subpoenas issued by the FBI, with no judicial oversight. They require phone companies, banks, and Internet service providers to turn over customer records. The “gag rule,” in the court’s words applied to “the mere fact that the FBI issued an NSL” and also, “most troubling to the Court, statements critical of the way that the government uses NSLs.”
When it comes to gag rules in the future, the court made two holdings:
1) “The government’s use of nondisclosure orders must be narrowly tailored on a case-by-case basis.” In other words, no blanket gag orders that apply to all NSLs.
2) “The nondisclosure orders must be subject to meaningful judicial review.” The revised Patriot Act had “judicial review” provisions that were too weak to pass constitutional muster.
This case is good news for creating the right set of rules around national security searches. It will be a good precedent to cite in other cases where the government is claiming that “national security” should trump the Constitution. It also will improve use of NSLs, which were the subject of a scathing report by the Department of Justice Inspector General earlier this year.
Here’s what we need to do next on NSLs:
– Especially in light of the court decision, Congress should consider the better checks and balances contained in bipartisan efforts such as the SAFE Act, introduced in the last Congress as S.737.
– Recipients of an NSL should receive a “Statement of Rights and Responsibilities.” This Statement would prevent over-reaching by the FBI. It would inform the recipient on issues such as the right to consult an attorney; the right to appeal an NSL to a court; and the limited scope of records that an NSL can cover.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
18 Responses to “Court Strikes Down Gag Rule for National Security Letters”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
EMAIL OR CALL YOU CONGRESSPERSON NOW TO FIND OUT ABOUT THIS ABOMINATION:
PLEASE FIND OUT WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THE ARRESTED PROTESTERS - MEMBER OF IRAQI VETERANS FOR PEACE!!!
http://www.dailykos.com/ storyonly/ 2007/ 9/ 7/ 74259/ 41317
Cops Shut Down Anti-War Press Conference in DC 9.6.2007
by xxdr zombiexx
Fri Sep 07, 2007 at 05:08:08 AM PDT
The Bush Administration appears to be escalating assaults on anti-war free speech in advance of the coming antiwar protest on 9/15/07.
We know the First Amendment has been under siege since he slithered into office but this is almost like a new level.
Make the jump for links and video.
To Protect and Serve…who?
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Mounted police charged in to break up an outdoor press conference and demonstration against the Iraq war in Washington on Thursday, arresting three people, organizers and an AFP reporter said.
“The police suppressed the press conference. In the middle of the speeches, they grabbed the podium” erected in a park in front of the White House for the small gathering, Brian Becker, national organizer of the ANSWER anti-war coalition, told AFP.
“Then, mounted police charged the media present to disperse them,” Becker said.
It was apparently not even a very large gathering but mounted police charged the crowd, scaring people, and arresting a couple member of Iraq Veterans Against the War. So they got to violate these people’s freedom of assembly AND arrest American veterans who have already served in Iraq…and lived to tell about it.
That’s protecting and serving, all right…
Three people — Tina Richards, the mother of a marine who did two tours of duty in Iraq; Adam Kokesh, a leader of the Iraq Veterans Against the War group; and lawyer Ian Thompson, who is an organizer for ANSWER in Los Angeles — were arrested, Becker said.
The ANSWER coalition is trying to rally support for an anti-war demonstration in Washington that is due to take place on September 15.
And Team Bush is trying desperately to squash dissent against their MASSIVE and UGLY war crime.
The Betray Us Petraeus Report is due out on the same day of the coming 9/15/07 Protest in Washington DC.
Well, maybe the fuzz had a reason to charge them: ANSWER, in it’s gross irresponsibility and scofflaw attitude
Last month, the movement was threatened with a fine of at least 10,000 dollars unless it removed posters in the city announcing the September 15 march.
Washington city authorities have said the posters had to come down because they were stuck on with adhesive that did not meet city regulations.
Using the wrong adhesive IS a reason to trash the Constitution now. The press conference was telling people to use the right paste.
Can you believe this shit?
I am wondering how they are going to react to the 9/15 March a week from today.
Again, especially for those who want very much to do SOMETHING, the telephone protest is a very feasible replacement and additional tactic for protesting the Democratic inaction on ending the Iraq Occupation.
No Cops.
No Cameras.
No Guns.
No tear Gas.
No injuries.
No Arrests.
No travel expenses.
No time constraints.
Easy. Safe. Effective.
Apply liberally.
Update [2007-9-7 10:48:2 by xxdr zombiexx]: chesapeake has an excellent collection of links here in a comment. Those averse to ANSWER or the Phone PRotest can look among those to see if any of them speak to them.
Update [2007-9-7 12:22:48 by xxdr zombiexx]: I decided to add the following music video to remind people what is at stake.
Video of active duty soldier in Iraq crying.
September 7th, 2007 at 3:32 pmMy (R) clients at the WH have always had a gag rule…..glug glug
September 7th, 2007 at 3:33 pmThe dems congress renewed this act .
why do the dems hate the constitution so?
September 7th, 2007 at 3:34 pmOne more tool to fight terrorists, out the door. Sounds good to me.
Word.
September 7th, 2007 at 3:37 pmUh oh,
Looks like Dean CT got himself banned!
September 7th, 2007 at 3:47 pmIt’s the daily newsletter from the writers of Think Surrender. Featuring hard-hitting censorship and suppression of facts you can’t find anywhere else.
September 7th, 2007 at 3:53 pmDean, I’m going to send you an email.
September 7th, 2007 at 3:55 pmThis is a good start in protecting our telephone, e-mail and Internet activities. With the proper judicial review, on a case by case basis, NSLs can be granted (as it should be). However, the ruling leaves our banking, credit reports, and other financial data open to the FBI’s instrusive, unchecked powers. Not a mention about how this affects libraries.
However, don’t get too excited since there’s a 90 day moratorium on the ruling allowing the gov’t to appeal.
It’s a start…
September 7th, 2007 at 3:58 pmRemember that these provisions will continue to be implemented, the gagging of NSLs etc., until this finds its way to the SCOTUS. A lowly federal judge holds no sway with the messianic idiots in the executive branch. The rule of law is over until chimpeachment and removal or 1.20.09.
September 7th, 2007 at 4:06 pmThe rule of law is over until chimpeachment and removal or 1.20.09.
Let’s hope that when it returns, it does so with a vengeance.
September 7th, 2007 at 4:11 pmLet’s hope that when it returns, it does so with a vengeance.
Comment by PeterW — September 7, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
–
If we had real justice, you leftards would be put into mental hospitals so you wouldn’t be able to insult our troops and embolden the enemy!
September 7th, 2007 at 4:19 pmMaster P, I never knew you were such the Stalinist.
Because that sounds a lot like the Soviet treatment of people who dissented from the Party.
September 7th, 2007 at 4:22 pmWow, another little Stalinist. Shall I pack for Siberia?
September 7th, 2007 at 4:24 pmReally, when it comes to authoritians like Dean or Mr. P, the distinction between fascist and stalinist is lost. The rhetoric differs, but the ideology is the same.
The rule of law is bad, and justice is the incarceration of the Enemies of the Party. Counter-revolutionaries all.
September 7th, 2007 at 4:27 pmOnward & upward to the level of transparency that the american people deserve.
September 7th, 2007 at 5:24 pmIf we had real justice, you leftards would be put into mental hospitals so you wouldn’t be able to insult our troops and embolden the enemy!
Comment by Master P — September 7, 2007 @ 4:19 pm
Says the wingnut that exhibits HOMOPHOBIA, PARANOIA and a host of other CLINICAL SYMPTOMS of mental illness. Sad, pathetic little Projectionist!
September 7th, 2007 at 6:00 pmSee, there you go again. You, sir, are emboldening the enemy.
Go ahead, play your role.
Comment by Dean CT — September 7, 2007 @ 4:23 pm
Emboldening the enemy? You mean like invading a muslim country and creating more Al Qaeda members than before the invasion? Or were you referring to you FOLLOWING Osama’s PLAN TO THE TEE?
As for us PLAYING OUR ROLE, you mean the one of AMERICAN CITIZEN? Because so far the only role you seem to be playing is ENEMY OF THE STATE and ENEMY OF THE CONSTITUTION!
September 7th, 2007 at 6:01 pmThis case is good news for creating the right set of rules around national security searches. It will be a good precedent to cite in other cases where the government is claiming that “national security†should trump the Constitution. It also will improve use of NSLs, which were the subject of a scathing report by the Department of Justice Inspector General earlier this year.
We’ve already got a good set of rules concerning national security searches:
Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
September 7th, 2007 at 8:32 pm