Vermont Congressman Bernie Sanders announced today that he will introduce legislation to "eliminate provisions in the USA Patriot Act that undermine Americans' Constitutionally guaranteed right to read and access information without governmental intrusion or monitoring." Sanders' legislation, which will be introduced in the House of Representatives in January, will amend Section 215 of the Patiot Act. Section 215 gives the FBI expanded authority to search the records of bookstores and libraries in foreign intelligence investigations: court orders authorizing the searches are issued secretly; they can target the records of people who are not suspected of committing crimes, and they contain a gag provision that prevents booksellers and librarians from even telling anyone about them.

Vermont booksellers and librarians helped persuade Sanders to introduce legislation by launching a joint letter-writing campaign that targeted members of the state's Congressional delegation. Sanders was joined at the press conference by Linda Ramsdell, owner of the Galaxy Bookshop in Hardwick and president of the New England Booksellers Association, and Karen Lane, president of the Vermont Library Association.

ABFFE, which participated in the drafting of the Vermont letter, will also help draft the legislation that is introduced in January.

ABFFE has joined media companies and press groups in urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision that severely restricts the ability of companies to reply to public criticism of their corporate practices. The case arises from a California lawsuit accusing Nike of making false statements in attempting to rebut charges that its Asian subcontractors violate fair labor practices. The plaintiff argues that the statements can be punished under the state law banning false advertising.

Both the California district court and court of appeals held that limiting a company's ability to respond to charges would have a chilling effect on public debate about corporate conduct. The plaintiff objected not just to advertisements but to every form of speech that Nike used to defend itself -- including press releases and letters to the editor. The plaintiff also did not allege that the company knowingly made false statements. Thus, practically any speech by a company that was later found to be incomplete or inaccurate could result in a lawsuit.

The lower courts ruled that fear of being sued would stop companies from talking to reporters altogether and stifle debate. However, citing U.S. Supreme Court decisions that approve broader limits on "commercial" speech than non-commercial speech, the California Supreme Court has overruled the lower courts.

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to announce soon whether it will take the case.

Daniel Ellsberg, the man who believed he was risking life in prison when he leaked the top secret Pentagon Papers in 1971, thinks it is vital for the press to be able to publish secret documents that reveal when a government is deceiving the public. Speaking during a program in New York that was co-sponsored by ABFFE, Ellsberg said that efforts to pass an official secrets act like the one on the books in Great Britain would have a chilling effect on First Amendment rights by discouraging people inside government from revealing secret information to journalists like Bob Woodward, whose books are heavily dependent on confidential information from anonymous sources.

While critical of excessive secrecy, Judith A. Miller, a former general counsel of the Department of Defense, observed that there are legitimate reasons for classifying information, particularly facts that could compromise the safety of troops during wartime. John R. (Rick) MacArthur, the author of a book about government censorship during the Persian Gulf war, said that throughout American history military necessity has been used to justify efforts to censor the press during war. The relatively unfettered coverage of the Vietnam was the exception, he said.

Ellsberg, the author of the new book "Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers," said that in the course of his trial for violating the Espionage Act his lawyers discovered that the law didn't really forbid the leaking of classified information. Nevertheless, they rated his chance of avoiding conviction at fifty-fifty. "Fifty-fifty? And I haven't broken any law?" Ellsberg asked increduously. "Well, let's face it, Dan. Copying seven thousand pages of top secret documents and giving them to the New York Times has a bad ring to it," his lawyer replied.

The program, "Government Secrecy, War and the First Amendment," was hosted by the Arthur Garfield Hays Civil Liberties Program at New York University Law School. It was co-sponsored by ABFFE, the Free Expression Network, the National Coalition Against Censorship and PEN American Center.