Archive.org Defeats FBI's Demand For User Information

eldavojohn writes "Although we don't know what they were after due to the settlement, a gag order was just released that kept Internet Archive member Brewster Kahle quiet. The FBI had issued a national security letter to them under the Patriot Act. Kahle fought it. Hard. The EFF came to the aid of his lawyers and what resulted was one of the only three times an NSL has been challenged: all three have been rescinded. The FBI agreed to open some of the court files now for it to be public. The ACLU added, 'That makes you wonder about the the hundreds of thousands of NSLs that haven't been challenged.'"

Comments

Re:Stupid Questions

[Gat0r30y]

The first time one of these was challenged, I thought any judge worth their salt would declare the NSL anti-constitutional. Already happened To quote:

In September 2004, Judge Victor Marrero of the Southern District of New York issued a landmark decision striking down the NSL statute and the associated gag provision. In striking down the gag provision, Judge Marrero wrote: "Democracy abhors undue secrecy. . . . [A]n unlimited government warrant to conceal, effectively a form of secrecy per se, has no place in our open society." The government has said it will appeal Judge Marrero's decision. Accordingly, the case is likely to be before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in early 2005. So maybe someday it will get before an appeals court, and then maybe someday much later, there is the possibility it could go before the supreme court, if they would hear it. Then it could be struck down.

Re:Stupid Questions

[dgatwood]

The problem is all the "ifs" in that. "If" the Supreme Court grants certiorari.... That's such a big "if" that it's not even funny.... They've proven remarkably resistant to any attempts to strike down challenges to the "Patriot" Act in the past, up to and including the refusal to grant standing for a challenge to anyone who could not prove that their privacy had been violated in the wire tapping case.

There are just too many Bush nominees on the court for this to get struck down as unconstitutional. Bush could probably wipe his backside with the Constitution, then declare martial law and postpone the election and they probably wouldn't overrule him....

Re:Stupid Questions

[tjohns]

I thought you couldn't discuss a NSL, so how would we know that hundreds of thousands of them have been issued?

According to Wikipedia, semi-annual reports need to be made to congress, including a non-classified count of National Security Letters issued.

The US Department of Justice also performed an audit in 2007 that contains some more statistics.

Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha

[wwahammy]

Nobody read it. The Senate received the bill at 6 AM for a 9 AM vote. The bill ran to hundreds of pages. Not one member of Congress could have read it and understood the consequences of the bill in less than 3 hours.

Russ Feingold said at the time he wasn't necessarily opposed to the bill but couldn't vote for something with such sweeping changes without having time to read or research it. He has said since then that after reviewing it he supports about 95% of the things in the bill. He strongly opposes that other 5% that is total crap.

Man I love having him as my Senator :)

Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha

[Anonymous Coward]

Grandparent's point was that Feingold was the only Senator to vote against it. There were also 66 Representatives who opposed it (mostly Democrats, but yes, including Ron Paul.)

Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha

[Maxmin]

Obama didn't vote for either Patriot Act or the Iraq War ... because he wasn't in office at the time. He did, however, vote *against* reauthorizing the Patriot Act. He's also on the record opposing the Iraq War, though I don't have handy the details of his war appropriations voting record.

Interesting factoid about the Patriot Act: it was passed in a hurry (we all know), and it was presented as legal tools for fighting terrorists. Now, I'd be fine with that, on the face of it - however, DOJ has been heavily promoting it as set of laws (and amendments to existing laws) for fighting crime. Yes, they are promoting to district attorneys etc. using all those bypass-the-constitution-anti-terrorism goodies to inspect the accounts and lives of people who aren't suspected of terrorism.

In other words, the Patriot Act doubles as an end-run around the Constitution for ordinary criminal cases. When I mention this in conversation to folks, many of them say they think this is fine! I don't.

Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha

[void*]

Yes, the Senate approved the reauthorization unanimously.

However, Congress is two parts, the Senate, and the House of Representatives.

In the House of Representatives, Republicans voted 214 for, 14 against, Democrats 43 for, 156 against.

Re:It's time for Civil Disobedience and Regime Cha

[zeroduck]

The Patriot Act wasn't passed unanimously. Russ Feingold (D-WI) voted against it.

Russ Feingold makes me proud to be from Wisconsin.