Assignment 5
Due various dates, depending on your group

Leading Class Discussion

At least once during the semester, you and the other members of a small group to which you are assigned will be in charge of the presentation of a topic in class and leading the resulting class discussion. Assignments of topics for such presentations will be distributed at least two weeks before they are due. This assignment will be completed by you as part of your small group and will be designed to help you consider critically one aspect of civil liberties and to enable you to gain the experience of presenting your findings after doing some independent reading and research on the subject. You and your group will be expected to meet with me at least once prior to your class presentation to review your findings, your plans for the class presentation, and your preparation for leading the discussion.

You will need to consider at least the following aspects of conducting the class discussion:

1. Read the assignment thoroughly and note the most important points, so that you can ensure that the seminar is cognizant of them

2. Locate and read additional related materials so that you are more fully informed on the subject

3. Plan carefully the points that you want to have the seminar discuss

4. Prepare thoughtful questions to help guide the discussion -- you may want to distribute the questions to members of the seminar before the class meets, so they can consider them in advance

5. Try to anticipate connections with other topics we have already discussed or will discuss and be prepared to include or postpone (because of time constraints) discussion of these

 

 

Alternative assignment 5, to replace in-class presentation

 

The following is a press release from the ACLU, available at http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nationalsecurityletters/32552prs20071105.html

 

Gagged National Security Letter Recipient Condemns Excessive Secrecy As Government Appeals His Case (11/5/2007)

“John Doe” and ACLU Say Appeals Court Should Affirm Invalidation of Patriot Act Provision

NEW YORK – The U.S. government today appealed a New York federal court ruling striking down the National Security Letter (NSL) provision of the amended Patriot Act.

The appeal comes in a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and New York Civil Liberties Union on behalf of a still-anonymous Internet Service Provider (ISP).  The ISP received an NSL demanding private information about a client and imposing a “gag order” preventing the ISP from disclosing its identity as the recipient of an NSL. NSLs are used to obtain access to subscriber, billing or transactional records from ISPs, to obtain a wide array of financial and credit documents, and even to obtain library records – all without prior judicial review.

A March 2007 report from the Justice Department’s Inspector General found serious abuses of the NSL power by the FBI. More recently, documents received by the ACLU in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit revealed that the Department of Defense secretly issued hundreds of NSLs, suggesting an expanded military role in domestic surveillance.

In September, Judge Victor Marrero of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York found that the gag provisions of the NSL statute were unconstitutional because they violated the First Amendment and the principle of separation of powers. Ruling that the gag provisions could not be severed from the remainder of the NSL statute, Judge Marrero struck down the entire statute. The court stayed enforcement of its ruling pending the government’s anticipated appeal, which the government filed today. The ISP plaintiff has been under a gag order now for more than three years.

The following can be attributed to “John Doe,” the President of the plaintiff ISP:

“Recent reports that the FBI and Defense Department have abused the NSL statutes only confirm my belief that the statutes give the government far too much power and that the secrecy surrounding the statutes is excessive and dangerous.

“Perhaps the most harmful consequence of the gag provisions is that they make it difficult or impossible for people like me – people who have firsthand experience with the NSL statute – to discuss their specific concerns with the public, the press, and Congress. This seems to be counterintuitive to everything I assumed about this country’s commitment to free speech and the value of political discourse.

“It has been especially frustrating to be operating under a gag order while Congress is considering whether to grant immunity to telecommunication companies that illegally disclosed information to the NSA. It is unfathomable to me that Congress is considering granting immunity to these companies that acted illegally while those who resisted illegal demands are prohibited even from identifying themselves or explaining their actions publicly.”

The following can be attributed to Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU’s National Security Project:

“In striking down the NSL statute, the District Court properly concluded that the FBI cannot constitutionally be given the authority to determine, without judicial oversight, which NSL recipients should be permitted to speak and which should be silenced. We are confident that the appellate court will reach the same conclusion.”

 

For related materials, you should go to the press release web site and look at the links on the right side of the page.

Your assignment is to write an essay of at least seven to eight pages that discusses the pending appeal and the issues that it raises, the relevant facts, precedents, and decisions that should inform a decision on the case, and how you would vote (affirm or reverse, in whole or in part), were you a judge hearing the case. You must provide a reasoned justification for your decision. You may write your paper in the form of an essay or, if you wish, in the form of an Appeals Court decision.

This paper is due to me at the same time as your final project, electronically by 5:30 PM on December 6.  It is worth 40 points.

 

Last updated 11/13/07