The Wake

In the height of the McCarthy era, beat poet Allen Ginsberg asked, “America, why are your libraries full of tears?” It was intended to be a metaphor for American history books lining library shelves. However, Ginsberg probably couldn’t foresee what his metaphor would mean 50 years later.

Since the USA Patriot Act was passed in October 2001, librarians across the country haven’t been telling people to stay quiet with the snap of a ruler. They’ve become one of the country’s most outspoken critics of the act.

“Libraries don’t try to stand in the way of law enforcement,” said Eric Celeste, Associate University Librarian for Information Technology. “But I think, personally, and in our organizations like the American Library Association (ALA), we vigorously oppose laws like the Patriot Act, which we think interfere with the kind of free-flow of information that have made our societies strong.”

Libraries across the country, including within the University of Minnesota, have been put in a difficult situation where they must carefully examine their own values and ethics because of the act.

One of the most highly contested portions of it is Section 215, which makes it easier for federal agents to look into business records of libraries and bookstores. This includes records of what library patrons check out and inquire about.

A common concern is that this will cause a chilling-effect on the types of materials people request from libraries because of the way the government will perceive them. For instance, if a student were studying terrorist groups for a class, a federal agency could see records of that and assume the researcher to be connected with terrorism. Some see this as a violation of First Amendment rights because it may deter people from seeking a wide range of information.

Celeste said he shares this concern but also noted the University doesn’t keep logs of who uses the Internet or handwritten requests for materials. The only personal records the library intentionally keeps are those showing which books are currently checked out and by whom.

Nationally, librarians have been destroying their patron’s borrowing records as soon as they’re no longer needed. Paper shredders from Santa Cruz, Calif., to northern Maine have been slicing apart records showing overdue charges for romance novels and materials the FBI may believe associated with terrorism.

Celeste said this is done at libraries within the University but made it clear this was always the policy.

“We do our best to clear those records as quickly as we can and as quickly as our systems allow because we don’t want to have that kind of information around,” Celeste said, “That’s been true before the Patriot Act.”

It’s the University’s policy to comply with any requests for records by the federal government, which means all University libraries must also comply. However, the Patriot Act reminds library employees to be extra careful with whom they give records to. Last October, a notice was given to library employees saying they cannot divulge personal records to anybody unless a warrant or subpoena is shown to them.

Everything about the Patriot Act’s relation to libraries is shrouded in secrecy. Librarians at the University cannot say if the FBI has come to ask for a student’s records, even if they’re your own. If they do, they’ll be charged with a felony.

It’s not publicly known whether there is a list of books the FBI has compiled that would put a red flag on a person’s record if they were to check out a specific book.

“You’d have to ask somebody who is putting up red flags,” Celeste said.

“No,” answered Paul McCabe of the FBI’s Field Office in Minneapolis, “It’s all been blown out of proportion.” McCabe said the FBI has always had the powers of the Patriot Act, however, they haven’t formulated a list for flagging people because they “don’t care and don’t have the time.” He said the FBI must have very specific information in order to get a warrant or subpoena from a federal judge.

However, this still doesn’t account for the secrecy surrounding Section 215.

In a speech last November, the most well-known advocate of the act, Attorney General John Ashcroft, said, “The Patriot Act has never been used to obtain records from a library. Not once.”

Well, not exactly.

Since the Patriot Act was passed in 2001, over 500 incidents of federal agents asking for an individual’s library records have been anonymously reported nationwide, said Charles Samuelson, director of the Minnesota Civil Liberties Union.

In the past two years, when federal agents asked librarians for their patron’s records, they didn’t follow procedure with the Patriot Act. Therefore, what Ashcroft said is technically correct because the act was not used to retrieve the records; intimidation was.

In many cases the librarians didn’t know what to do and gave up personal records without asking any questions.

But at the University, Celeste said, “In my experience, our staff are not easily intimidated.”

In another speech last September, Ashcroft mocked librarians for opposing the act and said they were indulging in “baseless hysteria.” He wondered aloud why the FBI would care “how far you’ve gotten on the latest Tom Clancy novel.”

In response to the remarks, the ALA has begun distributing buttons saying, “Another ‘Hysteric’ Librarian for Freedom” to librarians across the country.

Speaking for himself and not the University, Celeste said, “[The U.S. government] has passed laws in the passed six years that are very ill-considered and very damaging to democracy and our society. If that’s baseless hysteria, so be it.”

The Patriot Act is set to expire at the end of 2005; however, Ashcroft has been pushing to continue it past that date. Members of Congress are also pushing for the Victory Act, which adds to the powers wielded in the Patriot Act. Until these laws subside, Ginsberg’s tears may continue hanging from library shelves for those who believe First Amendment rights are being infringed upon.