Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 18:03:43 -0400
From: "Michael Walsh" <MJW at mail.press.jhu.edu>
To: <wsfalist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] "That Would Be Telling"
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

Meanwhile, over in the bookshelves . . .

mjw

>>> PW Daily for Booksellers 10/24/02 05:44PM >>>
-----------------------------------------------------------
ABFFE's Own Patriotic Act: It Joins in Suit Against Justice Department

A coalition of free-speech and electronic-rights groups have taken the
next step in their effort to extract more information about the
government's application of the Patriot Act, suing the Justice
Department under the Freedom of Information Act.

The plaintiffs, which include the American Booksellers Foundation for
Free Expression, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic
Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and the American Library
Association's Freedom to Read Foundation, have undertaken the effort
after the Justice Department gave the request expedited status but did
not turn over much of the information being sought. The Association of
American Publishers has not joined the suit, but spokeswoman Judy
Platt said the group is "totally and completely in support of the
litigation."

The Patriot Act, passed in October 2001, allows the seizing of records
from institutions like libraries and bookstores even in situations
where criminal activity is not suspected. It also imposes a gag order
that prevents those whose records have been seized from reporting what
happened. The suit seeks certain pieces of what it describes as
generic information, such as how many times the act has been used and
against what kind of establishments. It does not seek to uncover what
was revealed in these seizures.

Over the summer, the House Judiciary Committee sent a list of 50
questions about the use of the Patriot Act to the Justice Department,
and at one point even seemed on the brink of subpoenaing Attorney
General John Ashcroft. The Justice Department eventually answered
some, but not all, of the questions. The unanswered questions, say the
plaintiff, are important gaps in information and form the basis of
this suit.

The government has been claiming that national security concerns
preclude the release of the requested information, but the plaintiffs
argue that this is a fig leaf. "I don't see how it would jeopardize
national security [to have this revealed]," said EPIC general counsel
David Sobel. "What it would do is tell the public a great deal about
how the authority is being used, which can help shape the public
debate."

While Sobel acknowledged that little can be done about past seizures,
he noted that the information was important because "if it established
that a relatively high number of orders are directed at libraries and
bookstores, that would contribute to a public atmosphere that would
support amending or limiting the Patriot Act."

Under the Freedom of Information Act, the Department of Justice has 30
days to respond to the action, after which the plaintiffs will decide
whether to argue that the government is withholding information. Sobel
also said in the next several weeks the plaintiffs could file a motion
requiring a faster response than 30 days.--Steven Zeitchik