[Infowarrior] - Judges consider whether FBI violated free speech

[Richard Forno]

Judges consider whether FBI violated free speech
Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:12pm EDT
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN2750234720080827?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A panel of federal appeals court judges pushed a  
U.S. government lawyer on Wednesday to answer why FBI letters sent out  
to Internet service providers seeking information should remain secret.

A panel of three judges from the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals  
heard arguments on whether a provision of the Patriot Act, which  
requires people who are formally contacted by the Federal Bureau of  
Investigation for information to keep it a secret, is constitutional.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed suit in 2004 on behalf of an  
undisclosed Internet service provider against the U.S. government  
challenging the so-called National Security Letters (NSL) as well as  
gag orders placed on the recipients.

The appeals courts on Wednesday questioned a lawyer representing the  
U.S. government on whether the FBI violated free speech rights in  
placing the gag orders.

The government argues they are in place for national security  
concerns, such as keeping terrorists from learning what they are  
investigating.

"You can't tell me that any terrorist is going to make anything out of  
the fact you issued NSLs to AT&T and Verizon," said Circuit Judge  
Sonia Sotomayor, using a hypothetical example.

U.S. Assistant Attorney General Gregory Katsas said the FBI "assesses  
the need for secrecy in each particular case."

Between 2003 and 2006 nearly 200,000 national security letters were  
sent out. Of those about 97 percent received gag orders.

ACLU lawyer Jameel Jaffer said the gag order had prevented the small  
Internet service provider the ACLU was representing from speaking out  
"against an FBI investigation that he believes is illegitimate."

The government is appealing a lower court ruling that said the gag  
order violated the First Amendment guarantee of free speech and was  
unconstitutional.

The judges will rule on the issue in the coming months.

(Reporting by Christine Kearney, editing by Michelle Nichols)

© Thomson Reuters 2008 All rights reserved