ACLU Challenges Patriot Act

NEW YORK –The American Civil Liberties Union went public Wednesday with grievances over the constitutionality of the U.S. Patriot Act and a sealed case in federal court involving the government's “National Security Letter” power, which authorizes the FBI to obtain sensitive customer records from businesses without following typical procedures with respect to federal laws.

In detail, the National Security Letter enables the FBI to demand the names, screen names, addresses, email header information, and other sensitive information held by Internet Service Providers and other businesses, the disclosure of which violates a tradition of anonymous speech that goes back to the Federalist Papers, the ACLU claims.

“The National Security Letter provision allows the FBI to demand the sensitive records of innocent people in complete secrecy, without ever appearing before a federal judge,” said Jameel Jaffer, an ACLU staff attorney.

The National Security Letter is a "gag" provision of the Patriot Act, which has not been disclosed to the public at large or to other non-governmental agencies and businesses.

According to the ACLU, the National Security Letter provision violates the First and Fourth Amendments because it gives the feds carte blanche to circumvent judicial approval or even demonstrate a reason to acquire the information in the first place.

Prior to the enactment of the Patriot Act in 2001 after the Sept. 11 attacks, the FBI and other agencies could only us "invasive" authority in cases that involved confirmed suspected terrorists and spies. But with enforcement from the National Security Letter, the FBI can obtain information about anyone with no reason or recourse, says the ACLU.

The ACLU filed legal papers in the Southern District of New York on April 6, but was forced to file under seal to avoid being penalized for violating the gag provision of the Act.

Nearly a month later, parts of the case can be disclosed to the public, whereas some aspects of the lawsuit are still being sealed, further leading the ACLU to think that the Letter violates the constitution.

Defendants in the lawsuit include Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller. The case is assigned to Judge Victor Marrero.

“It is remarkable that a gag provision in the Patriot Act kept the public in the dark about the mere fact that a constitutional challenge had been filed in court,” said Ann Beeson, ACLU Associate Legal Director. “President Bush can talk about extending the life of the Patriot Act, but the ACLU is still gagged from discussing details of our challenge to it.”

The ACLU is scheduled to file a summary judgment motion on May 17, 2004. The government will respond on June 7, 2004, and according to the ACLU, all briefing will be completed in July 2004.

The court is expected to schedule arguments in the case in late summer 2004.

The ACLU has consistently challenged many aspects of the Patriot Act since its inception. Many other efforts are afoot nationwide to overturn the Act, which is slated to expire on Dec. 31, 2005.

Just over a dozen key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire, however, many portions have no expiration date and will continue to enforce government-related investigations indefinitely.

Copyright © 2025 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More News

UPDATED: Supreme Court Rules Against Adult Industry in Pivotal Texas AV Case

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday issued its decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, striking a blow against the online adult industry by ruling in support of Texas’ controversial age verification law, HB 1181.

North Carolina Passes Extreme Bill Targeting Adult Sites

The North Carolina state legislature this week ratified a bill that would impose new regulations that industry observers have warned could push adult websites and platforms to ban most adult creators and content.

Supreme Court Ruling Due Friday in FSC v. Paxton AV Case

The U.S. Supreme Court will rule on Friday in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, the adult industry trade association's challenge to Texas’ controversial age verification law, HB 1181.

Ofcom: More Porn Providers Commit to Age Assurance Measures

A number of adult content providers operating in the U.K. have confirmed that they plan to introduce age checks in compliance with the Online Safety Act by the July 25 deadline, according to U.K. media regulator Ofcom.

Aylo Says It Will Comply With UK Age Assurance Requirements

Tech and media company Aylo, which owns various adult properties including Pornhub, YouPorn and Redtube, plans to introduce age assurance methods in the United Kingdom that satisfy government rules under the Online Safety Act, the company has announced.

Kyrgyzstan Parliament Approves Measure Outlawing Internet Porn

The Supreme Council of Kyrgyzstan on Wednesday passed legislation outlawing online adult content in the country.

Trial Set for Lawsuit by U Wisconsin Professor Fired Over Adult Content

A trial date of June 22, 2026, has been set for the civil lawsuit filed by veteran communications professor Joe Gow against the University of Wisconsin board of regents, which fired him for creating and appearing in adult content.

New UK Task Force Meets to Target Adult Content

The architect of an influential report that recommended banning adult content deemed “degrading, violent and misogynistic” has convened an “Independent Pornography Review task force” aimed at translating that report’s findings into action in the U.K.

11:11 Creations Launches Affiliate Program

11:11 Creations principal Alicia Silver has launched 11:11 Cash for creators and affiliates.

Pineapple Support, Pornhub to Host 'Self Love' Support Group

Pineapple Support and Pornhub are hosting a free online support group for performers to develop self-love.

Show More