A growing number of members of Congress of both parties are concluding that Bernie was right. Seven months after Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) became the first Congressman to call for amending the USA Patriot Act to restore the protections for the privacy of bookstore and library records, they are joining the challenge to Attorney General John Ashcroft, who has labelled critics of the Patriot Act as hysterics. In addition to Sanders' Freedom to Read Protection Act (H.R. 1157), which has 138 co-sponsors, four bills have been introduced in the Senate.  To see a complete list of co-sponsors of H.R. 1157, click here. 

On October 15, Larry Craig of Idaho became the second Republican in the Senate to announce his intention to amend Section 215 of the Patriot Act. Craig and Dick Durbin (D-IL) have introduced the Security and Freedom Ensured (SAFE) Act, which limits searches of bookstore and library records to the records of people who are "foreign agents" engaged in acts of espionage or terrorism. Two other Republicans, Mike Crapo of Idaho and John E. Sununu of New Hampshire, are co-sponsoring the bill, S. 1709. The other Democratic co-sponsors of the Craig bill are Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin, Ron Wyden of Oregon, and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico.

ABFFE has endorsed the SAFE Act as well as Feingold's Library, Bookseller and Personal Records Privacy Act (S. 1507), the Protecting the Rights of Individuals Act (S. 1552), introduced by Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Ron Wyden (D-OR), and the Library and Bookseller Protection Act (S. 1158), introduced by Barbara Boxer (D-CA).  To see a summary of the acts, click here. To see a side-by-side comparison, click here.

The right of authors to write satire is being challenged in a Texas case where local officials claim they were libeled by a newspaper spoof that portrayed them as arresting a six-year-old girl on suspicion of making a terrorist threat in a book report on Maurice Sendak's Where the Wild Things Are. The article intended to burlesque the role that the officials had played in the arrest of a real 13-year-old for making terroristic threats in a Halloween horror story. However, the Texas courts have refused to dismiss the libel case on the grounds that a reasonable person could have believed that the wildly exaggerated claims in the story were really true. ABFFE will join other media groups in filing an amicus brief urging the Texas Supreme Court to dismiss the case. This is the second time in recent years that the right to parody has come under attack. In 2001, ABFFE filed an amicus brief when the estate of Margaret Mitchell attempted to block publication of Alice Randall's satire of Gone With the Wind --The Wind Done Gone.

Booksellers at four regional bookseller shows gave rave reviews to "Reading
Your Rights," a 26-minute documentary about the Tattered Cover Book Store's legal fight to protect the confidentiality of its customer records. The film was shown as part of the ABFFE program at the shows held by the Southeast Booksellers Association, the Mountains and Plains Booksellers Association, the Great Lakes Booksellers Association and Northern California Independent Booksellers Association.  More than a dozen booksellers said they were interested in showing the film at programs that would be held at their stores. Anyone who is interested in more information about "Reading Your Rights" may contact Caitlin Delohery at ABFFE, caitlin@abffe.com, (212) 587-4025.

The U.S. Supreme Court has announced that it will hear arguments in the case challenging the constitutionality of the Child Online Protection Act. ABFFE has joined ACLU and others in challenging the law, which bans the display of material that is "harmful to minors" on the Internet. The plaintiffs argue that the law violates the First Amendment rights of adults and older minors by denying them access to a wide range of material that is constitutionally protected. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has struck the law down on two occasions. However, the Supreme Court rejected the rationale of its first decision and sent the case back for further consideration.  To read more about the case, click here.