FBI Says ACLU’s Victory Claim Disingenuous

Posted on June 27, 2006

At the ACLU’s website we are hearing the shouts of “victory” over the FBI!

The American Civil Liberties Union today declared victory in their legal battle with the FBI over a Connecticut library group’s right to keep patron records private. After dropping their vehement defense of the gag provision accompanying the request, the FBI has now abandoned the demand all together.

“First the government abandoned the gag order that would have silenced four librarians for the rest of their lives, and now they’ve abandoned their demand for library records entirely,” said Ann Beeson, Associate Legal Director of the ACLU. “While the government’s real motives in this case have been questionable from the beginning, their decision to back down is a victory not just for librarians but for all Americans who value their privacy.”

To the ACLU this is a victory for that precious “right” to privacy for the ACLU against the “questionable” motives of the FBI. That is the way those that live in ACLU land see things. Of course there is always more than one perspective to the story. Here’s is how the FBI responded.

In May of 2005, the FBI issued a National Security Letter (NSL) to “The Library Connection”. The Library Connection is a consortium that provides back office support to a group of Connecticut libraries. The NSL requested information relating to a single computer that had been used to send information about a potential terrorist threat. The NSL states that the FBI was seeking specific information on any subscriber of billing information relating to a specific computer used within the 45 minute time period on the day the threat information was transmitted from a library’s computer. It is important to note that the information sought had nothing to do with obtaining reading lists of library patrons or any other information that would be reasonably considered intrusive upon any individual’s rights as a library patron. Obtaining information that could lead to the identity of the person who used a specific computer, at a specific time, to transmit threat information would have helped the FBI more efficiently investigate and evaluate an alleged threat involving terrorism. Under the law in effect in June 2005, the NSL was the most logical prescribed investigative tool to use in seeking electronic subscriber information in a counterterrorism investigation. Since then, Congress has changed the law as it relates to the secrecy requirements of an NSL in certain cases. That and the fact that the investigation is now complete allow us to engage in this important discussion.

Ultimately, the FBI was able to investigate and over time, discount the threat that was transmitted over this computer that was part of the Library Connection’s network. Conducting that investigation was less efficient because of the failure of the Library Connection to comply with the NSL. In this case, because the threat ultimately was without merit, that delay came at no cost other than slowing the pace of the investigation. In another case, where the threat may be real, the delays incurred in this investigation could have increased the danger of terrorists succeeding. Protecting the rights of Americans against unlawful search and seizure is sacred trust to the men and women of the FBI. Protecting Americans from the threat of terrorism and doing so within the law is our highest priority. It is disingenuous for the ACLU to suggest that preventing the FBI from obtaining information about who used a computer to send information about a potential terrorist threat during a 45 minute period constitutes “a victory not just for librarians but for all Americans who value their privacy.”
John Miller
Assistant Director
Federal Bureau of Investigation

So there you have it. Two sides to the same story. Its up to you to decide whether this was a victory. For the record I don’t think the ACLU was disingenuous. I think they sincerely believe that the “right” to privacy trumps any efforts by the government to stop terror plots. So, is making it more difficult for the FBI to conduct terror investigations a victory? It seems the ACLU think so.

» Filed Under ACLU, News, War On Terror

Trackback URL

Comments

One Response to “FBI Says ACLU’s Victory Claim Disingenuous”

kerwin_brown on June 28th, 2006 8:30 am

The National Security Letters are Warantless Searches. They are plainly unconstitutional since they are almost exactly what the Colonist had to deal with under King George. It is no more acceptable than the Kelo decision which also plainly violated the U.S. Constitution.