On December 11, 2002, WCLC organized a videoconference at the Norwalk Community College on “Safeguarding Our Patrons’ Privacy: What Every Librarian Needs to Know About the USA PATRIOT Act & Related Anti-Terrorism Measures". In an innovative twist on sponsorship, the Fairfield County Chapter provided dessert and beverages for attendees. Despite inclement weather, this topic drew a good turnout of both public and special librarians.

Panelists for this discussion were attorneys Tracy Mitrano, Policy Advisor for Cornell University, and Thomas M. Sussman, Partner, Ropes and Gray, Washington, DC; and librarians Gary Strong, Director, Queens Borough Public Library, and James Neal, Vice President and University Librarian, Columbia University Libraries.

Following brief opening statements, these panelists provided an analysis of the PATRIOT Act, and an assessment of the Attorney General's Guidelines expanding the investigative powers of the FBI, and the new Homeland Security Act. It was interesting to learn that the name of the law is actually an acronym. The full name is “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism”.

 

This Act is quite vague: It lacks definitions of certain terms, such as “content”, enabling the FBI to interpret as it sees fit (as one of the speakers noted, the FBI "is not likely to apply narrow standards to terms”). The Act also allows for the investigation of computer-based activity, even if no terrorism-related intent has been exhibited. It allows the seizure of any existing records, including computer use logs, patron records, or electronic reference communications. These legal orders are produced and signed by undisclosed parties, and the

library is not free to inform the public that such an order has been received.

 

This isn’t the only legislation or policy that has been impacted. The Freedom of Information Act has been altered by the Homeland Security Act; because of this, it is now more difficult for the public to obtain information on people or businesses that have been the focus of investigations. Hence, the public’s right-to-know has been significantly limited.

How do we react if we’re approached by investigators? What is our legal obligation as a representative of the library and as an individual?

The panel gave recommendations, and emphasized this advice several times during the discussion. If a search warrant is presented, we must allow investigators to conduct their search. However, if a subpoena is served, we should refer the document to the library’s legal counsel immediately.

It was strongly suggested that libraries be proactive and establish a policy for staff to follow should any of these scenarios arise. It should be clearly communicated that if no legal paperwork is presented, the staff should not hand over materials or give any type of information. Without legal paperwork, the request does not have to be honored on the spot. Staff should, however, contact their supervisor to have the request moved upward to legal counsel as quickly as possible. The panelists stressed that it’s important for libraries to know that they have legal rights to review and challenge any subpoena. This, too, should be part of the library’s policy.

 

One very important point that was raised during the conference is that these laws and regulations apply to private libraries as well as public. As librarians, we all need to be prepared.