Is Big Brother watching you?
According to many librarians around the nation, the answer is a
resounding “Yes.”
Provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act that would allow the FBI to
access library records to aid investigations have drawn outcries
from the American Librarians Association, which is afraid that the
government is violating First Amendment rights.
The PATRIOT Act, passed by Congress in reaction to the Sept. 11,
2001 terrorist attacks, allows the bureau to access book records of
library patrons and sift through Web sites and e-mails sent from
library computers.
Afraid that the government is reverting to investigative
policies of the 1950s, when the FBI indiscriminately pried into
private records to tag suspected communists, the ALA passed a
resolution last Wednesday condemning the act and calling for
tighter congressional oversight.
“Our services are in danger. Libraries are the bedrock of
democracy, the free exchange of ideas,” said Claudette
Tennant, an Internet policy specialist with the ALA.
Tennant adds that universities, as focal points for research and
debate, are rendered especially vulnerable to FBI “fishing
expeditions” for suspects.
“Because they are a place where there is a free exchange
of ideas, they do need to be concerned. I think the larger the
campus and the more culturally diverse it is, the more danger
it’s in,” she said.
Robert Bellanti, a librarian at UCLA, agrees that the FBI has
pushed their investigative powers too far.
“I’m deeply concerned abut some of the implications
of this. As a librarian, our professional value has always been to
uphold the confidentiality of our users. There’s a delicate
balance there,” he said.
“This seems to push it in a direction that is in
contradiction to values that most librarians hold.”
However, the FBI strongly denies accusations that it has or will
overstep its bounds, saying the PATRIOT Act will be used to sharpen
the focus of investigations, not act as a broad dragnet.
“I believe there are clear laws in place and procedures
that afford a very high level of protection of privacy,” said
FBI press aide Matt McLaughlin.
McLaughlin says in order for the bureau to seize library
records, they must first demonstrate to a judge sufficient evidence
exists to suspect someone of being an agent of a foreign power.
If the judge deems the FBI has probable cause, he or she would
issue a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act order which would
allow the bureau to go to a library and demand access to
records.
Much like a wiretap provision, as the investigation progresses,
the FBI must renew a FISA order by proving to the judge they still
have probable cause. If the judge disagrees, he or she can revoke
the FISA order.
Because of these provisions, McLaughlin dismissed the concern
that the FBI would adopt tactics it used during the Red Scare.
“That’s a long time ago. Legislation is in place to
(discourage) that, and it works,” he said.
Although McLaughlin denies that the PATRIOT Act has been evoked
to obtain library records, Tennant says there are indications that
some librarians have been approached by the FBI.
“We believe that (the FBI) has, and we would like greater
reporting to know to what extent these provisions are being
used,” she said.
Abby Lunardini, a UC press aide, says the FBI has not yet
approached the UC asking for access to its library records, but if
it does and obtains the proper court order, the UC would
comply.
Bellanti said that thus far, UCLA has also not been approached
by the FBI regarding library records, but given that UCLA is such a
large research institution, “it’s certainly
theoretically possible” it will happen in the future.
Should the FBI ever ask for records from a UCLA library,
Bellanti said he would immediately contact the campus counsel for
legal guidance before complying with a court order.
Andrew Sabl, a professor of public policy at UCLA, says the fact
that the FBI has to obtain a court order before asking for records
is important.
“The effort would discourage truly frivolous and random
digging,” he said.
Sabl says the typical UCLA student or faculty member has little
to fear from the PATRIOT Act and dismissed concerns that the FBI
would randomly investigate library patrons.
“They couldn’t if they wanted to. A nationwide
dragnet is impossible,” he said, citing a decline in FBI
manpower and technological prowess that would badly cripple efforts
beyond a focused investigation.
Amy Zegart, another professor of public policy at UCLA and a
researcher of counter-terrorism policy, dismissed comparisons of
the FBI to a Big Brother-like entity as “stupid.”
“Why would an agency do that? Why would you invest vast
resources in violating civil liberties? It doesn’t make sense
from the standpoint of effective law enforcement,” she
said.
Zegart said that, in her opinion, the government does not have
enough capabilities to combat terrorism and that civil rights
groups are overreacting.
“It’s one thing for a federal agency to snoop in
your own home. It’s quite another for a government agency,
under court order, to look at transactions you have made with
respect to a library,” she said.