[CTC] Sign-on: defending the right to dissent

Sat Aug 19 06:31:54 PDT 2017

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Melinda St. Louis" <mstlouis at citizen.org>
Date: Aug 18, 2017 4:58 PM
Subject: Could you send this to CTC list? FW: Sign-on: defending the right
to dissent
To: "arthur at citizenstrade.org" <arthur at citizenstrade.org>

*From:* Melinda St. Louis
*Sent:* Friday, August 18, 2017 4:52 PM
*Subject:* Sign-on: defending the right to dissent

This is not expressly trade-related, but for U.S. organizations, please
read this important call for sign-ons to protect our right to dissent.

*From:* Robert Weissman
*Sent:* Thursday, August 17, 2017 1:58 PM
*To:* Robert Weissman
*Subject:* Sign-on: defending the right to dissent

Friends,

The Department of Justice is seeking
<http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/346544-dreamhost-claims-doj-requesting-info-on-visitors-to-anti-trump-website>
identifying information for every person – estimated to be 1.3 million
people in total – who visited a website dedicated to organizing protests at
Trump’s inauguration. DOJ has served a warrant on a web hosting company,
DreamHost, which is challenging the validity of the warrant.

This shockingly overbroad request constitutes an egregious violation of
First Amendment and privacy rights, and if granted will have a major
chilling effect on dissent and protest.

It is also almost certainly foreshadows worse civil liberties violations to
come, if DOJ can get away with what it’s trying here.

It’s vital that civil society organizations defend the space on which we
rely. This is not one to be left only for groups focused on civil liberties
on Internet rights.

In light of which, please consider signing on to the attached letter (also
pasted below) to Jeff Sessions, asking the DOJ to rescind its records
request, and circulating this note widely to your networks.

Please send organizational signs-ons by Weds, Aug 23 to Jesse Franzblau at
jfranzblau at openthegovernment.org

Best,

Rob

Robert Weissman

President, Public Citizen

Email: rweissman at citizen.org

Tel: 202-588-1000 <(202)%20588-1000>

Apologies for cross-posts, but we’re really aiming to go broad with this
one.

-----------------------

August 2017

The Honorable Jeff Sessions
Attorney General
Department of Justice
Washington, DC 20530

Re: Justice Department request for data associated with Inauguration Day
protests

The undersigned organizations write to express alarm over the Justice
Department’s unconstitutional and extremely overly broad request for
information on all visitors to a website that had been used to organize
protests on Inauguration Day. The Justice Department’s attempt to access
information on any and all individual use of a website that expresses
political views about the current administration endangers First Amendment
protections, violates the Fourth Amendment, and creates the appearance that
the Justice Department lacks independence from the political will of the
White House.

The Justice Department recently filed a motion with the D.C. Superior Court
to compel the website provider DreamHost to comply with a search warrant
seeking practically all company records and information associated the
website www.disruptj20.org.[1] <#m_6225015721202266747__ftn1> According to
the response filed by DreamHost, complying with the request from the
Justice Department would amount to handing over roughly 1.3 million visitor
IP addresses to the government, in addition to contact information, email
content and photos of thousands of visitors to the website. The search
warrant would force DreamHost to disclose the content of all email
inquiries and comments submitted from numerous private email accounts and
prompted by the website.[2] <#m_6225015721202266747__ftn2> The information
yielded by this sweeping request would allow the government to identify
individuals engaged in constitutionally protected speech and dissent.

The website in question was used as a platform for providing and exchanging
information about Inauguration Day protests. The Justice Department has
asserted that it was also used in the “development, planning,
advertisement, and organization of a violent riot” that took place during
the Inauguration. But the warrant sought and obtained by the Department of
Justice is not limited to the approximately 200 individuals who were
arrested in connection with alleged violence. Instead, it seeks the
disclosure of information about each of the 1.3 million individuals who
visited the website, all of which is then subject to being searched by the
government.

The Justice Department’s request raises deeply troubling First Amendment
issues. Compliance with the warrant would effectively disclose to the
government a list of people who expressed opposition to the incoming
administration. Regardless of whether the administration takes any action
against those individuals, the provision of such a list would create a
significant chilling effect on future protests. Many people who wish to
peacefully express their dissent will refrain from doing so if they know
that the violent actions of any single protester could result in their own
Internet activity being sought and obtained by the Justice Department.

The warrant also fails to comport with the Fourth Amendment. A warrant must
identify with particularity both the places to be searched and the items to
be seized. A search of data pertaining to all 1.3 million individuals who
visited the website is the opposite of “particularized”: it is the very
“general warrant” that the Fourth Amendment’s authors intended to prohibit.
As for the information to be seized, the warrant does not identify specific
targets, include any time limitation, or provide any assurance that the
government will return or destroy the large portion of the information
irrelevant to the government’s criminal cases. This sweeping overbreadth
raises special Constitutional concerns where, as here, core First Amendment
associational rights are at stake, demanding heightened scrutiny.

It is no answer that a judge has signed off on the Justice Department’s
request. The difficulties of applying decades-old constitutional case law
to the digital era are notorious, and it is widely acknowledged that the
law has failed to keep up with technology. The Justice Department should
not be exploiting this Achilles heel of the justice system to see how far
it can trim back the protections of the First and Fourth Amendments.

The Justice Department request for information in this case conflicts with
core American values and should be rescinded immediately. Americans have a
right to seek information without fear of surveillance; they have a right
to privacy; they have a right to dissent; and they have a right to petition
their government without fear of persecution. Even in its prosecutorial
role – especially in its prosecutorial role – the Justice Department should
seek to uphold, not undermine, these constitutional protections. They are
central to what truly makes America great.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions,
please contact Lisa Rosenberg, Executive Director of OpenTheGovernment, at
lrosenberg at openthegovernment.org, or 202.332.6736 <(202)%20332-6736>.

Sincerely,

Undersigned organizations

------------------------------

------------------------------

------------------------------

------------------------------

------------------------------

------------------------------

[1] <#m_6225015721202266747__ftnref1> United State’s Motion for DreamHost
to Show Cause: https://www.dreamhost.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/
08/DH-DOJMotiontoShowCause.pdf

[2] <#m_6225015721202266747__ftnref2> DreamHost’s response in opposition to
United States’ Motion for DreamHost to Show Cause:
https://www.dreamhost.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/
08/DH-Opposition-Motion.pdf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.citizenstrade.org/pipermail/ctcfield-citizenstrade.org/attachments/20170819/c791b542/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Coalition Letter_DOJ request for J20 data.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 21830 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.citizenstrade.org/pipermail/ctcfield-citizenstrade.org/attachments/20170819/c791b542/attachment.docx>