OIF Blog

Today the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 11-8 to send the PATRIOT Act reauthorization bill to the full Senate. The New York Times and the Associated Press provide an overview of the hearing.

Senator Sessions (R-AL) offered several amendments (apparently sought by the Obama administration) that further limited provisions intended to increase civil liberties protections. All the amendments were adopted.

Of greatest interest to the library community is Sessions’ amendment to the proposed higher Section 215 standard for library records. The amendment eliminates the language “records pertaining to libraries” so that the higher standard only applies to library circulation records. Library records other than circulation records will therefore be subject to the same relevance standard applicable to all other business records and tangible things sought by a Section 215 order, even if such records associate users with the use of electronic books and other resources. For library circulation records, the government would have to prove that the records sought pertain to an agent of a foreign power, to a person in contact with or known to an agent of a foreign power, or to the activities of an agent of a foreign power.

Sessions’ amendments also alter proposed language that would have placed limits on NSL gag orders. One amendment eliminated the requirement that the FBI review all NSL non-disclosure orders on an ongoing basis and rescind the gag order when circumstances no longer warrant continuing it; instead, the FBI will only be required to review the facts supporting a gag order when an NSL recipient notifies the FBI that it would like the gag lifted. The second NSL amendment eliminated the court’s discretion on lifting a gag order: if the government makes the necessary showing, the court has no discretion to lift the gag; it “shall” keep it in place (previous language used “may”.)

The remaining Sessions amendments limited the minimization requirements for pen register/trap-and-trace orders.

Notably, Senator Durbin (D-IL) offered an amendment that would have imposed higher standards on NSLs. It was voted down.

Senator Feingold (D-WI) offered an amendment to impose minimization standards on the data collected by NSLs; it passed. But Senator Kyl (R-AZ) asked for, and won, an amendment that eliminated the requirement that the FBI offer “specific and articulable” facts to show that the NSL is relevant to an investigation; instead, the FBI will only be required to show “specific facts.”

(Thanks to the Center for Democracy and Technology for sharing their report on the hearing.)

Tags: Intellectual Freedom Issues, Privacy by Deborah Caldwell-Stone
No Comments »

In preparation of the 8th Edition of the Intellectual Freedom Manual, the Intellectual Freedom Committee revised several Interpretations of the Library Bill of Rights, which were adopted as amended by the ALA Council. The Committee also proposed three new interpretations to the Library Bill of Rights: “Importance of Education to Intellectual Freedom,” “Minors and Internet Interactivity,” and “Services to Persons with Disabilities.” “Services to Persons with Disabilities” was adopted by ALA Council during the 2009 Midwinter Meeting in Denver, CO. “Importance of Education to Intellectual Freedom” and “Minors and Internet Interactivity” were adopted by the ALA Council during the 2009 ALA Annual Conference in Chicago, IL.

All the revised and new Interpretations will be available in the 8th Edition of the Intellectual Freedom Manual. Publication of the Manual is scheduled to coincide with the 2010 ALA Annual Conference in Washington, DC. They are also available on our Web page, Interpretations of the Library Bill of Rights.

Tags: Intellectual Freedom Committee, Intellectual Freedom Issues by Nanette Perez
No Comments »

The American Association of School Librarians is presenting an informative and helpful preconference this year at its national conference in Charlotte, North Carolina:

“Law for School Librarians: Knowing Minors’ Rights” (Preconference)
Thursday, November 5, 8:00 a.m.–12:00 p.m., Charlotte, North Carolina
Fee: $109 (AASL member) / $214 (Non-member)

Preconference Summary: Learn how the First Amendment, state and federal laws, and judicial decisions affect the intellectual freedom of students using school library media centers. Topics to be covered include minors’ rights in school libraries, challenges to resources, labeling of resources, filtering Web resources, and privacy. Presenters will differentiate between public and private school libraries in terms of how laws apply, and will discuss the rights of younger versus older minors. Experienced library media specialists will facilitate group discussions and role playing related to challenges and students’ privacy, and will provide strategies for teaching students about their rights and responsibilities.

Presenters:

For more information and to register, please visit the AASL National Conference Web site.

Tags: Intellectual Freedom Issues, Intellectual Freedom Trainings, Privacy, Special Events, Uncategorized by admin
No Comments »

We invite all those who are new to ALA’s Annual Conference, to librarianship, to ALA itself, or to the world of Intellectual Freedom to attend the following session:

Intellectual Freedom 101
Friday, July 10, 2009
5:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.

McCormick Place West, Room W-194a

This session is part of ALA’s “Conference 101″ series of programs.

Our excellent speakers will discuss the history and ongoing work of OIF, IFC, IFRT, FTRF, COPE, the Merritt Fund, and more! Curious to know what these acronyms mean? Want to get more involved in this critical aspect of librarianship?  This is the session for you!

Tags: Committee on Professional Ethics (COPE), Freedom to Read Foundation, General Interest, Intellectual Freedom Committee, Intellectual Freedom Issues, Intellectual Freedom Round Table, LeRoy C. Merritt Humanitarian Fund, Midwinter Meeting/Annual Conference, Office for Intellectual Freedom, Privacy, Special Events by Jonathan Kelley
No Comments »

So often in library land the only IF stories we hear of are the long drawn out battles in library boards, school boards, city councils and the courts. Here’s an uplifting story sent in this week by a reader. It’s just one of those seemingly small battles which when taken with all of the other unknown victories is the reason why we still have the freedom to read in this county.

Last week Gail Robinson director of the Bridgeton Public Library, Bridgeton, N. J. received a “subpoena” from the state police seeking the borrowing records for a particular book. The specific book is actually unimportant as you will see. Gail, having attended several workshops given by the New Jersey Library Association, was well aware of New Jersey’s confidentiality statue. It requires a “subpoena issued by a court, or a court order.” After insisting on reading (great idea!) the “subpoena,” guess what? There was no indication that a judge or magistrate had been anywhere near it.

So, Gail took it over to the court house to have it checked out. The assistant prosecutor told her there was nothing wrong with the subpoena and that it would be some time before a judge would be available. When Gail offered to come back later, she was told that she couldn’t leave. No explanation.

She sat down and prepared to wait (as Gail said later, librarians should always have a book with them). When the prosecutor realized Gail wasn’t going to wilt, he quickly found a judge. The judge signed the subpoena making it conform to NJ law and the information was eventually provided — after consultation, of course, with the Library’s attorney, Ms Grayson Barber.

A seemingly small incident that could have blown up into something really big, if Gail hadn’t first, been knowledgeable and second, followed the rules — along the way getting law enforcement to follow them too, too their ultimate benefit. Way to go, Gail.

As for the original reason, apparently a library patron had found a “disturbing” photo inside the book in question and had taken the book with the photo to the police. When responding to the subpoena Gail included a note indicating that the book had been stored on an open shelf so that literally anyone could have had access to it. The borrowing records would prove nothing.

Thanks to Grayson Barber for bringing this story to my attention and once again many thanks to Gail for “doing the right thing.”

Tags: Intellectual Freedom Issues, Privacy by Doug Archer
No Comments »

OK, you ask, how’s he going to connect intellectual freedom and torture? Seems a bit of a stretch. Easy. Here’s how.

Intellectual freedom is concerned with the freedom of folks to access what ever information they wish without government limitation or intimidation. In order to ensure that folks are not encouraged to censor themselves we insist (and courts have held) that what we access is our own business and no one else’s — unless there is evidence linking us specifically to a crime (probable cause). OK, OK there is the little matter of the USA PATRIOT Act and NSLs but we’re working on that.

If we are concerned about the records of peoples’ reading habits being confidential, then we sure as heck should be concerned about the rights of people to think and believe what they want without fear of having it tortured out of them.

The fact that we as a society could even be having a public debate about the acceptability of “enhanced interrogation techniques” says something profound about how far our ethical base has eroded. Let’s be clear. Though I have no doubt that during many previous national crises some folks have stooped to torture, it has never, never been consciously accepted public policy to do so. In fact we have been in the forefront of international efforts to outlaw the very behavior now being justified as expedient. For example, after WWII we charged, tried, convicted and sentence at least one Japanese officer to 15 years at hard labor for waterboarding.

If folks can get away with justifying even just a little bit of torture, how much protection do you think will be left for reader privacy? If we can legally beat information out of someone, what’s wrong with a few subpoenas? Heck, why bother with a court order. Just let the government seize anything it wants when it wants it. It’s way past time for the average citizen to wake up and say enough, “have you no decency!”

Tags: General Interest, Intellectual Freedom Issues, Privacy by Doug Archer
No Comments »

One of the advantages I’ve discovered as a guest blogger is the relative freedom to ride ones own hobby horse. Well, I have a favorite for today. Banned Books Week (BBW). Or, more accurately, the people who complain that BBW is inaccurate, that the name is at best disingenuous and and at worse downright dishonest.

The argument goes thusly. Most books on the annual ALA list of banned and challenged books were “only” challenged, never banned. Even if some were removed from libraries, they are still available for purchase in book stores. Therefore, censorship hasn’t really happened because the government hasn’t banned the books.

Sounds to me as if these folks are second cousins to the young man who gave new meaning to the word chutzpah. When charged with murdering his parents he asked for leniency because he was an orphan! Chutzpah! Hey, since folks were unsuccessful in their efforts to get these books banned, you can’t use them as examples of the threat of censorship. We failed therefore you’re being dishonest. Chutzpah!

Run that by me again? Just because libraries and librarians have been so good at defending the freedom of the public to read as they choose, means that we’re being dishonest? No, it just means were doing our job.

As for whether removing books from libraries is censorship or not, public and school libraries are government bodies. If they buckle under to challenges and remove books from the shelves, they remove those books from the reach of the average citizen. If censorship involves the government restricting access to information, they are most certainly engaged in censorship.

As for still being available for purchase, that is true for most of the books in our libraries. If you follow that line of logic, we might as well close up shop. There would be no reason to have a public library. You want a book; go buy it.

So, in a few months when Banned Books Week rolls around and someone challenges it for being misleading, gently point out the error of their logic. Or just shout Chutzpa and let them figure it out.

Tags: Banned Books Week, Intellectual Freedom Issues by Doug Archer
No Comments »

A new administration in Washington. New possibilities. Hope springs eternal, etc., etc. With the arrival of President Obama lots of folks in the intellectual freedom community (me included) were pretty optimistic. One of his very first actions was to sign an order requiring government agencies to be more responsive to freedom of information inquiries. Good sign. At the same time during his confirmation hearings Attorney General Eric Holder was arguing for the retention of USA PATRIOT Act powers to go after library records. Not so good.

Since that first week, I’ve seen a pattern of advocating more transparency, oversight and accountability under law while at the same time retaining the extended powers of the Bush years. Am I disheartened? No, not really. During the euphoria of that interim from election to inauguration [warning, religious reference coming], whenever things got too giddy I kept thinking of a passage from the Psalms , “Do not put your trust in princes….”

It’s just plain old human nature. Once someone, almost anyone of any political party or persuasion gets power, they find it very difficulty to let go. They will find all kinds of reasons for holding on. For advocates of intellectual freedom this means that, while the climate may have improved, the battle continues. Keep the faith!

Tags: Intellectual Freedom Issues, Privacy by Doug Archer
No Comments »

During the last few years there have been two significant court battles over the use of library meeting rooms by religious groups.  One was in California (Faith Center Church Evangelistic Ministries v. Glover) and the other in Ohio (Citizens for Community Values, Inc. V. Upper Arlington Public Library
Board of Trustees).   They came to almost opposite conclusions.

In the California case it was decided that a Library could bar a religious group from using its meeting rooms for worship.  The Ohio decision said “No, you can’t.”  Of course, the decisions themselves were more nuanced that this but, since neither was heard by the Supreme Court, we don’t have a national precedent to guide us.  What should libraries do?

First, it seems to me that two extremes are putting us library folks in a bind. Some people seem to want to co-opt public space for religious purposes mostly but not exclusively from an evangelical Christian point of view.  They don’t seem have heard of the separation of church and state.  Another group seems to want to completely exclude anything to do with religion from public space.  They don’t seem to have heard of the freedom of religion.

Libraries are about providing a place where people can read, listen to, view and otherwise access whatever they wish — from serious research to recreation.  In collections of books,videos and CDs this is pretty obvious.  What’s so different about meeting rooms?  If a community group wants to gather in a public room for a legal purpose, why should we care what their point of view is?  As long as no single group or view point is allowed to monopolize a limited resource like a public meeting space what difference should it make to us as keepers of the space?

What  should we do?  Simple, set up a set of content neutral rules that mandate appropriate behavior and apply them to all community groups — dog lovers, cat fanciers, lepidopterists, gun collectors, philatelists, cooks, political parties, advocacy groups, the Klan, even church groups!  This won’t eliminate conflict but it just might keep us out of court.

Tags: Intellectual Freedom Issues by Doug Archer
No Comments »

The following is a statement issued by American Library Association President Jim Rettig regarding efforts to remove Library Board members and to restrict materials in the West Bend (Wisconsin) Community Memorial Library:

“Last week, the West Bend, Wisconsin Common Council voted to deny reappointment to four Library Board members, based on objections to these members’ ‘ideology’ and their adherence to library policy concerning challenges to materials in the library collection. This move appears to be motivated largely in response to an ongoing campaign that seeks to restrict access to books in the West Bend Community Memorial Library’s young adult collection of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender fiction and nonfiction.

“We are dismayed by and deeply concerned about these developments. Libraries connect people and ideas, by providing access to a diverse array of information to meet the needs of everyone in the community. Whatever their personal beliefs, library board members have an obligation to support this unique role of the public library. When individuals or groups attempt to block access to library materials in the name of their own particular beliefs, we must all oppose such efforts and we must preserve the intellectual freedom rights of the entire community.

“Fanning the flames of this controversy, opponents of open access in libraries have launched a campaign spreading fear and misinformation. Newspaper and radio ads call on the community to ‘protect our children,’ and have compared the removal of books from the library to buckling a child’s seat belt. A city Alderman has even gone so far as to compare the West Bend Community Memorial Library to a porn shop.

“The materials in question are not pornography. They include award-winning novels and acclaimed works of nonfiction. To advocate for the removal or restriction of these materials on the basis of partisan or doctrinal disapproval is censorship, pure and simple. Parents who believe a book is not appropriate for their own children are free to make that decision—for their children; they do not have the right nor the authority to make it for anyone else’s children.

“Because it supports intellectual freedom, the American Library Association (ALA) opposes book banning and censorship in any form, and supports librarians and library board members whenever they resist censorship in their libraries. Since our society is very diverse, libraries have a responsibility to provide materials that reflect the interests of all of their patrons.

“We stand in support of the librarians and Library Board members of the West Bend Community Memorial Library and the community members who defend intellectual freedom and open access to ideas. By resisting calls to censor potentially controversial materials, they promote and protect true education and learning, and uphold the cherished freedoms that we, as Americans, hold most dear.”

See also: Letter to the members of the West Bend Common Council from the Office for Intellectual Freedom (PDF file)

See also:  Joint Letter from Free Speech Groups Criticizing Library Board Dismissals (PDF file)

See also a statement from UW-Milwaukee School of Information Studies (PDF file).

Tags: Censorship, Intellectual Freedom Issues by Deborah Caldwell-Stone
No Comments »