War on terrorism raises library-privacy concerns

Erica D. Johnson

Thursday, Oct. 24, 2002 | 9:46 a.m.

Local librarians are walking a tightrope between protecting their patrons' privacy and obeying a law that could allow authorities to seize library records in an effort to fight terrorism.

Library representatives from Clark and Washoe counties met at the Sawyer State Office Building on Wednesday to discuss how librarians should handle information requests from law enforcement officials.

The meeting was held to examine the Patriot Act, a federal law that makes it easier for authorities to acquire information they deem necessary to obstruct potential terrorists.

Under the law signed by President Bush on Oct. 26, 2001, authorities can demand library records of people suspected in terrorist activities, particularly suspects who represent a foreign power. The law states there must be probable cause.

Library records that could be seized include library card information, book check-out history and Internet log-on records. All seizures must be accompanied by a court order signed by a judge.

Critics say the law infringes on the civil liberties of library patrons, denying their right to privacy. They say the law is another way for the government to spy on innocent citizens.

"I personally feel like my liberties are being trampled on because it's so much easier for them to come in and demand information," said Margaret Long, who sits on the board of directors of Pahrump's library system. "If they did ask for something, I'd have to investigate it to find out if there was probable cause."

The Pahrump library system has no legal counsel.

The Patriot Act amended more than 15 federal statutes, including federal wiretap laws and immigration laws.

Though Nevada's Library Confidentiality Law states any library record that contains the identity of the user is confidential and not public record, federal law overrides state law, Allen Lichtenstein, a spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, said.

Libraries are not required to keep such records, but those that do must surrender them if asked by authorities.

All types of observation in plain view, including behavior recorded on library surveillance tapes, are not considered confidential.

In other states, police have issued search warrants to people researching passport information on the Internet or checking out books on pipe bombs, said Mary Minow, president of the California Association of Library Trustees and Commissioners.

Minow urged librarians to educate themselves on search warrant policies and challenge information requests not properly documented.

"No one here wants to stop the war on terrorism in any way," she said. "But the privacy of what we read is fundamental. We need precise targeting and not fishing expeditions. Our reading is chilled when the government is watching."

Some government officials say attitudes like Minow's could hinder crucial terrorist investigations.

"We're at war," Patrick King, senior deputy state attorney general, said. "In times of war, you generally waive certain freedoms. It's chilling when you think of what could happen. It's all of our responsibility to help out."

King warned that any person who resists or delays the process of a search warrant could be held in contempt of court or arrested for interfering with police in the line of duty.

"What gives you the right to determine that patrons have a right to privacy?" he asked. "I was raised to think libraries were vessels of public information."

Gerald Welt, general counsel for the Las Vegas-Clark County Library District, said King was creating an opposition that wasn't there.

"We have to balance the patron's right to privacy with public law," he said. "He's indicating that we're on one side or another. We just want to obey the law. We've been completely cooperative."