Zur Navigation | Zum Inhalt
     
 
A blog of all section with no images
Electronic Border Searches: An Open Letter PDF Print E-mail
User Rating: / 0
Letters to Government Agencies Signed by TMA
Written by Coalition   
Thursday, 01 May 2008

Electronic Border Searches: An Open Letter

May 1, 2008

Chairman Bennie G. Thompson
Ranking Member Peter T. King
United States House of Representatives
Committee on Homeland Security

Dear Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member King:

We are writing to urge the House Committee on Homeland Security to hold hearings on the Department of Homeland Security's practice of searching and seizing Americans' digital information and electronic devices at U.S. borders. We also urge you to consider legislation to prevent abusive search practices by border agents and protect all Americans against suspicionless digital border inspections. In a free country, the government cannot have unlimited power to read, seize, store and use all information on any electronic device carried by any traveler entering or leaving the nation.

This issue is particularly critical in light of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' recent decision in United States v. Arnold, which permits customs officials to search laptop computers at the border without any suspicion or cause.1 Despite reassurances that border patrol agents are well trained and supervised,2 the public has been unable to learn through open government laws which policies and procedures Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) has in place to protect travelers against arbitrary or abusive searches. Therefore, Congress must exercise oversight to ensure that border searches are not overly invasive or discriminatory, and establish appropriate safeguards to protect any information collected and maintained by the government.

  • This concern is real. The press has reported disturbing stories of travelers whose electronic devices were seized by the government as they crossed U.S. borders. Ellen Nakashima, Clarity Sought on Electronic Searches, Washington Post, Feb. 7, 2008, at A1. In each case, the traveler, a member of an ethnic minority, was detained, and his or her digital device taken by a government agent. In two cases, the digital devices were password-protected corporate laptops.
  • The government's "profiles" are arbitrary. CBP has said that "suspicious" travelers include men traveling from Asia between the ages of 20 and 59, a category so broad as to be meaningless. See Editorial, Looking into Laptops, Los Angeles Times, Nov. 11, 2006.
  • The government will not tell the public what it is actually doing. Numerous Freedom of Information Act requests have been filed to learn more about the government's policies and procedures for conducting electronic border searches. Unfortunately, agencies have been slow to respond and have refused to turn over a great deal of important information. This is particularly troubling when CBP is solely responsible for protecting travelers' civil liberties at the border.
  • Everyone's privacy and security are at stake. Your information may be compromised even if you don't travel yourself. The Association of Corporate Travel Executives has warned its members to consider the implications of traveling with confidential corporate information such as personnel records. American law firms that represent companies with offices in other countries are also concerned about their clients' confidences. Any individual's laptop can hold vast amounts of personal information such as financial records, confidential information related to business dealings and client relationships, and communications with friends, family and business associates. Allowing the government unchecked access to such information not only violates privacy and security, but also chills free expression.

The Fourth Amendment protects us all against unreasonable government intrusions. But this guarantee means nothing if CBP can arbitrarily search and seize our digital information at the border and indefinitely store and reuse it. We urge the Committee to hold swift hearings on the Department of Homeland Security's border search practices and consider legislative action to ensure that Americans' electronic devices are not subject to abusive, arbitrary or suspicionless searches at the borders.

For additional information, please feel free to contact Electronic Frontier Foundation Senior Staff Attorney Lee Tien at (415) 436-9333 x. 102.

Sincerely,

9/11 Research Project
American Association of University Professors
American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression
American Civil Liberties Union
American Immigration Lawyers Association
Asian Law Caucus
Association of Corporate Travel Executives
Professor Matt Blaze, University of Pennsylvania
Business Travel Coalition
Center for Democracy and Technology
Center for Digital Democracy
Susan Landau (Sun Microsystems, for informational purposes only)
Liberty Coalition
Minnesota Coalition on Government Information
The Multiracial Activist
Muslim Advocates
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
National Center for Transgender Equality
National Coalition Against Censorship
Citizen Outreach Project
Defending Dissent Foundation
Whitfield Diffie (Sun Microsystems, for informational purposes only)
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Electronic Privacy Information Center
EnviroJustice
Equal Justice Alliance
Fairfax County Privacy Council
Feminists for Free Expression
Lauren Gelman, Executive Director, Stanford Law School Center for Internet and Society
Identity Project
PEN American Center
National Workrights Institute
OpenTheGovernment.org
People For the American Way
Republican Liberty Caucus
Professor Ronald L. Rivest, MIT
Professor Aviel D. Rubin, Johns Hopkins University
Rutherford Institute
Professor Fred B. Schneider, Cornell University
Bruce Schneier
U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation
The Woodhull Freedom Foundation

1 United States v. Arnold, No. 06-50581, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 8590 (9th Cir. Apr. 21, 2008).

2 "Customs keeps track of the border searches its agents conduct, including the reasons for the searches. This administrative process should help minimize concerns that gas tank searches might be undertaken in an abusive manner." United States v. Flores-Montano, 541 U.S. 149, 156 (2004) (Breyer, J., concurring).

Be first to comment this article | Add as favourites (7) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 20

 
National Security Letters Reform Act, S. 2088 PDF Print E-mail
User Rating: / 0
Letters to Government Agencies Signed by TMA
Written by Coalition   
Tuesday, 22 April 2008

April 22, 2008 

 

Hon. Patrick J. Leahy, Chairman

Hon. Arlen Specter, Ranking Minority Member

Senate Committee on the Judiciary

224 Dirksen Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

 

Re:  National Security Letters Reform Act, S. 2088

 

Dear Chairman Leahy and Ranking Member Specter: 

The Judiciary Committee will soon consider issues relating to National Security Letters.  We write to express our support for the National Security Letters Reform Act (S. 2088).  

The PATRIOT Act and Intelligence Authorization Act of FY 2004 drastically expanded the FBI's authority to obtain the business and personal records of Americans by issuing National Security Letters (NSLs).  NSLs, which do not require prior judicial approval, can be used to obtain a wide range of documents based upon vague claims that the information is merely "relevant" to a terrorism investigation.  Once the FBI acquires records with an NSL, it can keep them indefinitely, even when it concludes that the subject of those records is innocent of any crime and is not of intelligence interest. 

Undeniably, the FBI needs prompt access to some of the types of information currently acquired under NSLs, but the current method of self-policing simply does not work.  Reports issued by the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Justice in March 2007 and March 2008 documented the drastic expansion of the use of NSLs and their subsequent abuse.  The IG’s reports also show that NSLs are increasingly used to obtain records about Americans, making reform all the more important.  The NSL Reform Act appropriately addresses the problems uncovered by the Inspector General's reports by establishing statutory safeguards and judicial oversight while protecting privacy concerns and bolstering national security interests. 

The bi-partisan NSL Reform Act includes many beneficial reforms.  First, it would limit the reach of NSLs by allowing only less sensitive personal information to be made available under this authority.  Other existing authorities could still be used to obtain the more sensitive information that would no longer be available with an NSL.  It would require the government to determine that records sought with an NSL relate to someone who is connected to terrorism or espionage.  The bill would require the Attorney General to issue minimization procedures for information obtained through NSLs, and to create a system to track their use.  It would also enhance oversight by requiring additional reporting to Congress.  The act would also establish reasonable limits on the “gag” that attaches to an NSL, requiring it to be narrowly tailored and limiting it to 30-days, extendable by a court.  The bill would also tighten the standards for court-issued orders under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act (the “library records” provision) by requiring the government to show that the records sought relate to a suspected terrorist or spy, or to someone directly linked to such a person. 

We believe this bill takes significant steps toward achieving a balance between privacy and national security concerns.  We ask that the Judiciary Committee consider this legislation and report it favorably as soon as is practical.  For more information, please contact ACLU’s Michelle Richardson, This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it , 202/715-0825.  

 

Sincerely,

American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee

American Civil Liberties Union

American Library Association

American Policy Center

Association of Research Libraries

Bill of Rights Defense Committee

Center for American Progress Action Fund

Center for Democracy & Technology

Constitution Project

Concerned Foreign Service Officers

Defending Dissent Foundation

DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

Electronic Frontier Foundation

Equal Justice Alliance

Federation of American Scientists

Friends Committee on National Legislation

Government Accountability Project

Gun Owners of America

Japanese American Citizens League

League of Women Voters of the United States

Liberty Coalition

The Multiracial Activist

National Security Archive

National Lawyers Guild--National Office

OMB Watch

OpenTheGovernment.org

Unitarian Universalist Service Committee

United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society

U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation

 

cc:  Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee 

 

Be first to comment this article | Add as favourites (6) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 21

Last Updated ( Friday, 09 May 2008 )
 
National Security Letters Reform Act, H.R. 3189 PDF Print E-mail
User Rating: / 0
Letters to Government Agencies Signed by TMA
Written by Coalition   
Tuesday, 15 April 2008
April 15, 2008
 
Hon. John Conyers, Jr., Chairman
Hon. Lamar S. Smith, Ranking Minority Member
House Committee on the Judiciary
2138 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC  20515-6216
 
Re:  National Security Letters Reform Act, H.R. 3189
 
Dear Chairman Conyers and Ranking Minority Member Smith:
 
The Judiciary Committee will soon consider the bi-partisan National Security Letters Reform Act (H.R. 3189).  We write to express our support for this legislation.
 
The PATRIOT Act and Intelligence Authorization Act of FY 2004 drastically expanded the FBI's authority to obtain the business and personal records of Americans by issuing National Security Letters (NSLs).  NSLs, which do not require prior judicial approval, can be used to obtain a wide range of documents based upon vague claims that the information is merely "relevant" to a terrorism investigation.  Once the FBI acquires the records with an NSL, it can keep them indefinitely, even when it concludes that the subject of those records is innocent of any crime and is not of intelligence interest.
 
Undeniably, the FBI needs prompt access to some of the types of information currently acquired with NSLs, but the current method of self-policing simply does not work.  Reports issued by the office of the Inspector General of the Department of Justice in March 2007 and March 2008 documented the drastic expansion in the use of NSLs and their subsequent abuse.  The IG’s reports also show that NSLs are increasingly used to obtain records about Americans, making reform all the more important.  The NSL Reform Act appropriately addresses the problems uncovered by the Inspector General's reports by establishing statutory safeguards and judicial oversight while protecting privacy concerns and bolstering national security interests.
 
The NSL Reform Act includes many beneficial reforms, some of which we summarize below.  First, it would protect Americans’ privacy by requiring that NSLs only be used to obtain records that pertain to suspected terrorists or spies.  Thus, it would re-establish the pre-PATRIOT Act requirement that there be specific and articulable facts giving reason to believe that the records sought pertain to an agent of a foreign power.  The bill would also establish reasonable limits on the “gag” that attaches to an NSL, requiring it to be narrowly tailored and limiting it to 30-days, extendable by a court. The bill also provides for a recipient's right to seek judicial review of an NSL issued to it.  The bill would require the Attorney General to issue minimization procedures for information obtained with an NSL, and enhance oversight by requiring additional reporting to Congress.  
 
We believe this bill takes significant steps toward achieving a balance between privacy and national security concerns.  We ask that the Judiciary Committee consider this legislation and report it favorably as soon as is practicable.  For more information, please contact Gregory T. Nojeim at the Center for Democracy & Technology, 202/637-9800 x113.
 
 
Sincerely,
 
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
American Civil Liberties Union
American Library Association
Association of Research Libraries
Bill of Rights Defense Committee
Center for American Progress Action Fund
Center for Democracy & Technology
Constitution Project
Concerned Foreign Service Officers
Defending Dissent Foundation
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Federation of American Scientists
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Government Accountability Project
Japanese American Citizens League
League of Women Voters of the United States
Liberty Coalition
The Multiracial Activist
National Security Archive
OMB Watch
Unitarian Universalist Service Committee
U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation
 
cc:  Members of the House Judiciary Committee

Be first to comment this article | Add as favourites (7) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 22

 
My Profound Phenomenon PDF Print E-mail
User Rating: / 1
Default Category
Written by Scottie Lowe   
Friday, 28 March 2008

Be first to comment this article | Add as favourites (28) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 542

Read more...
 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Results 1 - 4 of 1553
 
     
Free Joomla! Templates provided by funky-visions.de
Template modding by Sven Brier