Archive | Transparency

This First Amendment Day, fight for the free flow of information

By on September 23, 2013 in Center for Media Law and Policy, First Amendment, Journalism, Transparency

UNC will hold its fifth annual First Amendment Day Sept. 24, a celebration of our rights to speak, publish, worship, assemble and protest without government intervention. It’s easy to celebrate free expression. It’s sometimes harder to notice when that freedom is being eroded by the government.

In the year since First Amendment Day 2012, we’ve learned that our First Amendment rights — particularly the freedom of the press — have been compromised in the name of security. In May, the Associated Press and Fox News revealed that the Justice Department had secretly seized phone records and searched emails between reporters and sources in an effort to investigate leaks. In July, New York Times reporter James Risen lost an appeal in federal court challenging a Justice Department subpoena ordering him to testify and reveal his confidential sources in a criminal prosecution. In the July trial of Private First Class Bradley Manning, the government argued that publishing leaks to the general public could constitute “aiding and abetting the enemy” under the Espionage Act. And some reporters say that their ability to promise their sources confidentiality has been jeopardized by the mass surveillance of Americans’ phone call and email data.

This year, First Amendment Day is more than a celebration. It’s a reminder that we have to constantly fight for the free flow of information — in the courts, in newsrooms, in Congress, in our state and at our school.

This year’s keynote address by Bruce Brown, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, will explore the Obama Administration’s relationship with the media. “If there was ever any doubt that a war on leaks could not be conducted without a war on the press and the public’s interest in the free flow of information, the government seems to have answered that question for us,” Brown said in a statement in May, following revelations that the Justice Department had executed a search warrant for a Fox News reporter’s emails.

A panel discussion at the UNC School of Law will focus on one possible protection for press freedom: a federal shield law that would protect reporters from having to reveal their confidential sources in a federal investigation or trial. Panelists will discuss the “Free Flow of Information Act” introduced in Congress this year, the definition of a “journalist,” and whether a federal shield law should cover bloggers, citizen journalists, and student reporters.

These are just two of many events addressing the need for education and action around First Amendment rights. For more information, check out the full schedule of events. All events are free and open to the public.

Natasha Duarte is a 2L at the University of North Carolina School of Law and a first-year master’s student at the UNC School of Journalism and Mass Communication.

0
0

Unintended Targets: The NSA’s bulk email collection and Obama’s use of the word “targeting”

By on August 23, 2013 in Internet, Privacy, Transparency

A Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court opinion released yesterday shed more light on how the National Security Agency collects Americans’ email data, highlighting the disconnect between the NSA’s collection practices and the Obama Administration’s characterization of email surveillance under the PRISM program.

The FISA Court opinion held that methods used by the NSA from 2007 to 2011 of collecting email data — including the content of email subject lines, senders, and times of transmission — violated the Fourth Amendment and Federal statutes. While the NSA can collect emails involving foreign senders and recipients under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, it cannot collect purely domestic emails.

Until 2011, the NSA’s collection of emails involved collecting “bundles” of emails from individuals’ inboxes, failing to separate the purely domestic emails bundled with the “targeted” emails involving non-U.S. persons. Basically, the NSA was collecting screenshots of individuals’ inboxes when only one of many emails in the screenshot was the subject of the investigation.

Since details of the PRISM email surveillance program were leaked in June, President Obama has repeatedly told Americans not to worry because “the NSA cannot target your emails.” While the President has never clarified what “targeting” means, this opinion makes it clear that, at least before 2011, the fact that Americans’ emails were not “targeted” doesn’t mean they were not collected.

Several proposed amendments to key sections of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, including a bill that failed in a close House vote last month, would prohibit the “bulk” collection of data. These amendments would require the NSA to show that someone is the subject of an investigation before it collects that person’s data.

Natasha Duarte is a 2L at the University of North Carolina School of Law and a first-year master’s student at the UNC School of Journalism and Mass Communication.

0

UNC Grad to Head Open Government Coalition

By on August 12, 2013 in Transparency

A recent graduate of UNC’s dual-degree program in media law, Jonathan Jones (M.A., J.D. 2011), has been named director of the North Carolina Open Government Coalition and Sunshine Center at Elon University.  He also will teach courses in Elon’s School of Communications.

Currently an assistant district attorney for Durham County in North Carolina, Jones will begin his new job in mid-August.  In his new job, Jones will work with the coalition’s board to organize the state’s annual Sunshine Day, advise citizens about open government issues, produce webinars or workshops around the state, handle communication for the coalition, and find new ways to inform North Carolina citizens of the value and processes of open government in the state.

Jones previously worked for the NCOGC as a legal intern in summer 2010.  He researched business models for a regional nonprofit investigative reporting center.

In a press release, Jones said: “I’m ecstatic to pick up on the tremendous work coalition members have already been doing to educate record holders and record seekers about our state’s open government laws.  Transparency in government is the cornerstone of democracy. It instills public trust and gives citizens faith in their government. I look forward to helping sunshine find its way into communities across our state.”

At UNC Jones served as editor-in-chief of the First Amendment Law Review and worked on UNC’s Innocence Project.  He has published in the First Amendment Law Review, News Media & The Law, and “Sunshine, Inc.: The Basics of Covering Business Organizations” produced by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

He earned an undergraduate degree in journalism from UNC and worked for six years as a reporter at newspapers in Maryland and Virginia and at the News & Record in Greensboro.

The North Carolina Open Government Coalition unites organizations interested in ensuring and enhancing the public’s access to government activity, records, and meetings. The nonpartisan coalition educates people about their rights, supports their efforts to gain access, and advocates the principles and benefits of open government. The Sunshine Center is the educational arm of the NCOGC and focuses on outreach efforts to inform citizens about the importance of government openness.

0

EFF Week 3: The First and Fourth Amendments — down, but hopefully not out

By on June 9, 2013 in First Amendment, Internet, Privacy, Transparency

It was a busy week at EFF. The phones have been ringing almost non-stop with journalists, supporters, and concerned people. The news outlets wanted interviews with attorneys. The supporters wanted to commiserate. The concerned people wanted answers — how can the government do this, and what does it mean? Of course, the fact that the National Security Agency has been spying on Americans’ phone records was the big story, but that’s not the only threat to our rights to privacy and free speech that we suffered this week.

Warrantless DNA searches

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that police can take a DNA sample from someone who is arrested — not even convicted of a crime — without a warrant. A DNA swab is a search under the Fourth Amendment, and this is the first time the Court has allowed an exception to the need for a warrant for general crime solving and investigative purposes. The majority held that the “search” was only the cheek swab to collect the DNA, not the subsequent steps of extracting the DNA profile and comparing it to an FBI database of DNA left at crime scenes.

Revenge porn

Also on Monday, new legislation passed the California State Senate’s Public Safety Committee that would make the electronic distribution of revenge porn a misdemeanor. Revenge porn is the practice of posting pictures of former romantic or sexual partners online. EFF Staff Attorney Nate Cardozo was interviewed by ABC about the bill’s First Amendment implications.

Nate being interviewed by ABC News. The interns were filmed for some B-roll, but we didn’t make the cut.

Nate being interviewed by ABC News. The interns were filmed for some B-roll, but we didn’t make the cut.

 Nate said that while revenge porn is a “serious issue,” the California bill is not narrowly tailored enough to pass First Amendment scrutiny because it punishes not only the “bad actor” (the person who posts pornographic pictures) but also everyone who distributes the images once they are posted.

NSA phone and Internet data collection

On Wednesday and Thursday, The Guardian published leaks from Edward Snowden revealing that the National Security Administration has been operating a broad, untargeted phone and Internet spying regime for at least seven years. Wednesday’s leak revealed that the NSA has been collecting the phone records of millions of Verizon customers, including all calls made into, within, and out of the United States. Thursday’s leak revealed that the NSA has been intercepting certain information from major Internet companies including Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, and Skype.

These leaks confirm that the government has been using secret law to justify warrantless spying on Americans. The Fourth Amendment generally protects us from warrantless, suspicionless searches by the government. The NSA derives its authority to collect phone records from secret opinions and orders from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court interpreting the Patriot Act. Unlike other courts, whose opinions are public, FISA Court opinions and orders are kept secret.

Why we should care that the government is collecting our phone records

In a statement on Thursday, President Obama said we shouldn’t worry about the NSA’s data collection because the government is not listening to our phone calls. It’s true that the NSA needs to obtain a warrant, based on reasonable suspicion, to listen to the content of someone’s phone call. But even without hearing your conversation, the NSA can obtain an alarming amount of data about you based on whom you called, where you called to and from, and when the calls were made. This information is commonly referred to as “metadata,” and EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl’s new blog post explains why it matters. These are some of Kurt’s examples illustrating what your phone records might reveal to the NSA:

  • They know you called the suicide prevention hotline from the Golden Gate Bridge. But the topic of the call remains a secret.
  • They know you spoke with an HIV testing service, then your doctor, then your health insurance company in the same hour. But they don’t know what was discussed.
  • They know you received a call from the local NRA office while it was having a campaign against gun legislation, and then called your senators and congressional representatives immediately after. But the content of those calls remains safe from government intrusion.

President Obama also said that we can’t have 100 percent privacy and 100 percent security. He believes the government has struck the correct balance. He said he welcomes a national debate about how much privacy we want to give up in the name of fighting terrorism. However, he also said he does not welcome leaks about the NSA’s spying programs. How can we have a real debate about how much spying is too much, and how can the American people have a say in the so-called balance between privacy and security, when the government does all it can to hide the details of and justifications for its data collection programs?

Woody comes to California!

Me and Woody at a reception for the Privacy Law Scholars Conference.

Me and Woody at a reception for the Privacy Law Scholars Conference.

Woodrow Hartzog, brilliant privacy scholar, law professor, UNC J-School alumnus (Ph.D. 2011), and the best mentor a nerd could ask for, came to town this week for the annual Privacy Law Scholars Conference. Woody presented a working paper with Daniel Solove on privacy law and the FTC. It was so great to catch up!

0