Librarians in a crossfire

Previous |Next|   Table of Contents

In the midst of the debate in Washington, a study commissioned by the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy in 2005 found that public and academic libraries had received more than 130 legally executed requests by federal, state or local law enforcement officers since October 2001. The study made clear that librarians feel they must walk a fine line to balance the needs of law enforcement and protecting the rights of their patrons to read freely without fear of government interference.

Not surprisingly, the balancing act wound up in court. In September 2005, a federal judge ruled that the FBI must lift a gag order that prevents a Connecticut "organization with library records" from discussing its receipt of a National Security Letter (NSL) subpoena for information. The decision marked the second time a federal court had dealt a blow to the NSL expansion in the USA PATRIOT Act; the first ruling found that the entire NSL provision was unconstitutional.

In the Connecticut decision, which has been stayed until the government’s appeal is heard and decided, U.S. District Court Judge Janet Hall wrote that "the statute has the practical effect of silencing those who have the most intimate knowledge of the statute’s effect and a strong interest in advocating against the federal government’s broad investigative powers" under the USA PATRIOT Act.

The two cases have been combined in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York.

Next  

Previous |  Table of Contents