{"id":53490,"date":"2016-09-30T11:27:00","date_gmt":"2016-09-30T16:27:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/content.findlaw-admin.com\/ability-legal\/supreme\/legal-commentary\/the-fbis-misuse-of-national-security-letters-reveals-the-often-false-dichotomy-between-security-and-privacy.html"},"modified":"2016-09-30T11:27:00","modified_gmt":"2016-09-30T16:27:00","slug":"the-fbis-misuse-of-national-security-letters-reveals-the-often-false-dichotomy-between-security-and-privacy","status":"publish","type":"supreme","link":"https:\/\/supreme.findlaw.com\/legal-commentary\/the-fbis-misuse-of-national-security-letters-reveals-the-often-false-dichotomy-between-security-and-privacy.html","title":{"rendered":"The FBI’s Misuse of National Security Letters Reveals the Often-False Dichotomy Between Security and Privacy"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n \n
\n
\n\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n\n\n \n \n
<\/a><\/td>\n\n

The FBI’s Misuse of National Security Letters Reveals the Often-False Dichotomy Between Security and Privacy<\/h1><\/td>\n <\/tr>\n

By MICHAEL C. DORF<\/h2><\/a><\/td>\n <\/tr>\n

Wednesday, Mar. 14, 2007<\/td>\n\n <\/tr>\n <\/table>\n \n\n\n

<\/b>The Patriot Act greatly increased the FBI’s authority to issue so-called “national security letters” (NSLs)–warrantless demands for private information from third parties such as phone companies, Internet service providers and banks. When Congress reauthorized the Patriot Act in early 2006, it did so on the condition that it receive detailed information about the use, misuse, and efficacy of NSLs. Last week, Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine issued his first report on NSLs<\/a>. <\/p>

The results are not pretty. Among the problems identified by the report are: sloppy and inconsistent recordkeeping by the FBI, which resulted in substantial under-reporting of errors within the FBI; NSLs that were signed by personnel without proper authorization to do so; confusion among recipients of NSLs that resulted in disclosure of private information to which the FBI was not entitled; and most disturbingly, a pattern of short-circuiting the already-streamlined NSL process by improperly labeling requests as exigent in the absence of any exigency.<\/p>

\n