 |
 |
Error during command authentication.
Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=10061, phase=CONNECT, target=127.0.0.1:2306). The server is probably not started.
FYI >ALAWON: American Library Association Washington Office Newsline >Volume 14, Number 73 >August 1, 2005 > >In This Issue: Senate Passes PATRIOT Reauthorization Bill > >Late on Friday, July 29, the final day before its summer recess, >the Senate passed S. 1389 (the USA PATRIOT Improvement and >Reauthorization Act of 2005) on unanimous consent (no debate, no >amendments, no roll call vote). The bill adds to the USA PATRIOT >Act many of the safeguards for library and reader privacy that >have been sought by the library community since the passage of the >law in 2001, including tougher requirements for searching library >records under Section 215. > >The vote was a surprise, coming just one week after the Senate >Judiciary Committee passed the S. 1389 and the House passed H.R. >3199 and just when everyone thought the Senate was rushing out the >door for its summer recess. The two bills will now need to be >reconciled by a Conference Committee. We will get back to you with >message and contacts. For now, here is a brief comparison of the >bills. > >Sunsets >Both bills reauthorize sections of the PATRIOT Act that would >expire at the end of this year. The House bills extends the sunset >period for Section 215 to 2015; the Senate to 2009. The shorter >sunset is preferable because it will cause more oversight by >Congress. > >Section 215 >The House legislation allows the FBI to obtain library records of >anyone whenever they are "relevant" to a counter-terrorism or >counter-espionage investigation. The Senate bill requires the FBI >to give facts showing reason to believe that the records sought >are "relevant to" counter terrorism or counter intelligence >investigation, and that items "pertain to" a foreign power, agent >of a foreign power, or person in contact with a suspected agent or >are "relevant to" the activities of a suspected agent who is the >subject of the investigation. It also requires the FISA Court to >"find" these facts (i.e., not just rubber-stamp the request). The >Senate bill also requires records or other things to be described >with "sufficient particularity" to allow them to be identified - >reducing the danger that that the FBI will engage in fishing >expeditions in library or bookstore records. > >The House legislation requires the Director of FBI to personally >approve any request for records from a library. The Senate >legislation requires the personal approval of Director or Deputy >Director of the FBI for library, bookstore, firearms or medical >records. Both bills allow disclosure of receipt of a Section 215 >order to "any person necessary to produce the tangible things >pursuant to an order under this section" or "an attorney to obtain >legal advice." The Senate version allows a recipient to consult an >attorney to obtain legal advice "in response to an order under >this section;" the House version only "with respect to an order >under this section." > >Both bills allow the recipient of a Section 215 order to challenge >the order. The House version allows this only in special "petition >review panel" of the FISA court and only to determine "legality" >of the order. The Senate bill gives recipient of the order the >right to challenge both the order itself (on same basis as for a >grand jury subpoena) and the secrecy/gag order, but only in the >FISA court. > >The Senate bill improves the reporting required of the Justice >Department. It requires that the DOJ report annually on the total >number of applications made for Section 215 orders approving >requests for the production of tangible things, and the total >number of orders either granted, modified, or denied, when the >application or order involved the production of tangible things >from a library (as defined in section 213(2) of the Library >Services and Technology Act), or the production of tangible things >from a person or entity primarily engaged in the sale, rental, or >delivery of books, journals, magazines, or other similar forms of >communication whether in print or digitally, as well as records >related to the purchase of a firearm, health information (as >defined in section 1171(4) of the Social Security Act), taxpayer >return information. > >Section 505 >Both the Senate version and the House version allow a recipient of >a National Security Letter to challenge the request in a U.S. >District Court. The House version allows the court to set aside if >it is "unreasonable" or "oppressive." The Senate version permits >the court to set it aside if "unreasonable" or "oppressive" or it >would violate a constitutional or legal right. > >In regard to the gag order, both bills allow a challenge to the >gag order in a U.S. District Court. In the House bill, the gag >order is no longer automatic but is based on a certification that >disclosure would harm national security, interfere with diplomatic >relations, harm an investigation or endanger life or physical >safety. In the Senate version the court can set it aside unless >doing so would harm national security, interfere with an >investigation, interfere with diplomatic relations, or endanger >life or physical safety. In both bills ,if the government >certifies this would result, certification must be treated as >"conclusive." In the House bill, if a year has elapsed since >issuance of the order (or previous challenge), issuing official >must re-certify but certification is still conclusive. > >Both bills allow the government to go to a U.S. District Court to >seek enforcement of the NSL. The Senate stops there. The House >bill makes violation of the enforcement order punishable as >contempt. It establishes new penalties for violating the gag >order of up to 1 year in prison, or up to 5 years if committed >with intent to obstruct an investigation or judicial proceeding. > >****** >ALAWON (ISSN 1069-7799) is a free, irregular publication of the >American Library Association Washington Office. All materials >subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be >reprinted or redistributed for noncommercial purposes with >appropriate credits. > >To subscribe to ALAWON, send the message: subscribe ala-wo >[your_firstname] [your_lastname] to [log in to unmask] or go to >http://www.ala.org/washoff/alawon. To unsubscribe to ALAWON, send >the message: unsubscribe ala-wo to [log in to unmask] ALAWON >archives at http://www.ala.org/washoff/alawon. > >ALA Washington Office, 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Suite 403, >Washington, D.C. 20004-1701; phone: 202.628.8410 or 800.941.8478 >toll-free; fax: 202.628.8419; Web site: >http://www.ala.org/washoff. Executive Director: Emily Sheketoff. >Office of Government Relations: Lynne Bradley, Director; Don >Essex, Joshua Farrelman, Erin Haggerty, Patrice McDermott and >Miriam Nisbet. Office for Information Technology Policy: Rick >Weingarten, Director; Carrie Lowe, Kathy Mitchell, Carrie Russell. >ALAWON Editor: Bernadette Murphy. __________________________________________________________________ Mail submissions to [log in to unmask] For information about joining ARLIS/NA see: http://www.arlisna.org/join.html Send administrative matters (file requests, subscription requests, etc) to [log in to unmask] ARLIS-L Archives and subscription maintenance: http://lsv.uky.edu/archives/arlis-l.html Questions may be addressed to list owner (Kerri Scannell) at: [log in to unmask]