Sununu: Legislation to Improve Patriot is 'Victory in Susbstance, and Principle'

SUNUNU: LEGISLATION TO IMPROVE PATRIOT ACT IS "VICTORY IN SUBSTANCE, AND PRINCIPLE"

Senate vote moves New Hampshire Senator's bill to protect civil liberties toward final passage

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

WASHINGTON, DC - With strong bipartisan support, the Senate voted today (2/28) to invoke cloture (end debate) on legislation introduced by United States Senator John Sununu (R-NH) that bolsters support for Constitutional rights in the PATRIOT Act. In remarks delivered on the Senate floor prior to the 69 to 30 vote, Sununu said the bill (S. 2271) represents a substantial step forward in the long effort to clarify and improve civil liberties protections in the terrorism-fighting law. Sununu issued the following statement regarding the bill:

"I want to touch on the three elements of this bill so that all Senators and the public understand how each of these provisions takes us forward. Maybe the agreement represented in this bill does not move us as far forward as some in the Senate might like, but it moves us forward nonetheless.

"First, in this bill, we create an explicit review of the gag order that accompanies a 215 subpoena. Some have criticized the fact that there is a 12-month waiting period for taking that gag order before a judge.

"In our legislation, the SAFE Act, we had a three-month waiting period. We asked for a three-month waiting period, and we ended up with a 12-month waiting period. That is the nature of compromise, but we did get an explicit judicial review of the gag order. I think the principle that any gag order be given an opportunity for review before a judge is not only a step forward but a victory on principle, and it will guide us in the future when we deal with similar questions.

"Second, we eliminated language in the conference report that required the recipient of a National Security Letter to disclose the name of their attorney to the FBI. That is a provision that doesn't occur anywhere else in the law. It is a provision that could discourage people from seeking legal advice. And in the case of a National Security Letter - a subpoena issued without the approval of a judge - we are not talking about a few dozen subpoenas or a few dozen individuals or businesses affected; we are talking about tens of thousands. Striking that requirement regarding the recipient of an NSL notifying the FBI the name of their attorney, I think, again, is a very important step forward not only in encouraging people to seek legal advice but also a very important principle to set down in this bill.

"A third improvement is clarification libraries engaged in their traditional role of lending books, providing books to patrons in digital format, or providing access to the Internet, is not subject to a National Security Letter. This is an important clarification of Congressional intent, an important clarification of the existing law which, unfortunately, is not clear on this point.

"It is not clear because the underlying law uses definitions that were written 20 years ago before the age of the Internet. I hope the Judiciary Committee will take up a full review and evaluation of the definitions and the standards regarding technology and the underlying law that is referenced here. In lieu of that, the least we can do is provide clarification as to how and when this law applies to institutions such as libraries. We have done so in a positive and meaningful way.

"I look forward to passage of the bill. I was pleased to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in getting this done. In doing so, in forcing us to take more time and forcing the Administration to add additional protections for civil liberties to the legislation and putting together a bipartisan group willing to demand these things, we sent an important message, a message that we have a group willing to work in Congress to achieve these improvements and a message to the Administration that when we are dealing with these issues, they need to be engaged and active and working toward consensus from the very beginning of the process."

http://www.sununu.senate.gov/pressapp/record.cfm?id=251960&&year=2006&