Sen. Grassley seeks documents related to subpoena of AP reporter's records
By The Associated Press,
freedomforum.org staff
09.05.01
Printer-friendly page
 |
| Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa |
WASHINGTON — Sen. Charles Grassley has asked Attorney General John Ashcroft for documents related to the government subpoena of an Associated Press reporter's telephone records.
The Justice Department subpoenaed the personal phone records of reporter John Solomon while trying to identify unidentified law enforcement officials who told the AP about a wiretap intercept of New Jersey Sen. Robert Torricelli's conversations.
The department received the records just 10 days after the May 4 AP story ran. Grassley, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the government must now justify the subpoena.
"I know you share with me the belief that the protection of the freedom of the press is a central pillar of our democracy," Grassley, R-Iowa, said in a letter to Ashcroft yesterday. "There is no question that efforts by the Justice Department to subpoena the records of a reporter should be done with caution and only when the needs of justice are great."
Grassley asked for a "timeline of all relevant events regarding the subpoena, all related documents, and a listing of all individuals who were involved or advised in the decision to issue the subpoena, their title and a brief description of their role."
Grassley requested that the Justice Department reveal whether any other information on Solomon was obtained and what technology was used to retrieve the telephone records.
"Going after reporters' telephone records with a subpoena should happen almost never," Grassley said yesterday in a written statement. "When it does, the bar should be very high and the circumstances extraordinary. It should never happen until every other avenue is exhausted."
Justice Department officials declined to comment on Grassley's letter. A private group that defends government whistleblowers urged Congress to investigate the Justice Department for the subpoena last week.
The Justice Department's actions will have "a profound and lasting 'chilling' effect on the legitimate flow of information," the National Whistleblower Center said in a letter to the chairmen of the Senate and House judiciary committees.
The Associated Press has said it may seek legal action.
Meanwhile, a bookstore owner says the Justice Department has agreed not to pursue subpoenas seeking details of purchases by Torricelli, D-N.J., over the past six years, The Seattle Times reported today.
The subpoenas for Arundel Books sought details of purchases by Torricelli and seven other people at the company's stores in Los Angeles and Seattle, the Times reported. It did not identify the seven other people. However, The Washington Post reported last week that one of the seven was David Chang, a New Jersey businessman who was seeking Torricelli's help in business dealings with the North and South Korean governments and is a cooperating witness in the investigation.
A federal prosecutor connected with the case in New Jersey said the office cannot comment on continuing investigations, the Times said.
Subpoenas also were served on Olsson's Books in Washington, D.C., and Books and Books in Coral Gables, Fla. According to a statement released yesterday by the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, the subpoenas against all three bookstores have been dropped.
Arundel Books owner Phil Bevis said yesterday that the U.S. Attorney's Office in New Jersey had agreed, for the time being, not to pursue the subpoenas. Bevis' attorneys argued that the subpoena was overly broad and sought information that was protected.
Bevis was supported by Chris Finan, president of the ABFFE in New York, who said the subpoenas "would have a chilling effect on the First Amendment rights of all bookstore customers.
The subpoena served on Bevis' Seattle store on Aug. 8 sought sales invoices, credit card receipts and the records of any deliveries on behalf of Torricelli and the others.
Journalists from across the nation have expressed outrage over the subpoena of Solomon's phone records, with many newspapers using their editorial pages to vent their displeasure.
In a Sept. 3 editorial, The Washington Post said, "The Justice Department has a legitimate interest in uncovering the source of leaks in sensitive investigations. ... So if officials who saw the AP's story wanted to know who was responsible, the instinct was understandable. It was, however, an instinct that should have been
resisted or pursued by other means."
The New York Daily News said in an Aug. 31 editorial, "The Justice Department's secret subpoena of an Associated Press reporter's home phone records has sent a chill through the media. But every American should feel a shiver down the spine."
The Oregonian, Portland, wrote in an Aug. 29 editorial, "This kind of overzealousness borders on intimidation. The First Amendment right to gather and report the news should protect reporters and their sources from secret government snooping into their personal lives."
Last week a Justice Department official confirmed that the subpoena had been approved by new FBI director Robert Mueller, as one of his last acts before leaving his temporary Justice Department post. Mueller was acting deputy attorney general until May 14. Approval for the subpoena was made on or before that date.
A government official who spoke on condition of anonymity has confirmed that the Justice Department's chief spokeswoman also recommended approving the subpoena.
The role of department public affairs director Mindy Tucker, who was a senior spokeswoman for President Bush's election campaign, emerged Aug. 31 as the White House issued its first comments on the controversy.
"The president does not think it is a proper course of action for the White House to tell the Justice Department how to go about its investigations," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said when asked about the department's obtaining the reporter's phone records.
Update
Justice says it went after reporters' phone records 13 times in past decade
Department’s response to controversy about subpoenaing journalists prompted more questions from Sen. Charles Grassley.
09.07.01
Previous
While at Justice, current FBI director approved subpoena for reporter's records
Sen. Charles Grassley sharply criticizes decision, saying such drastic action should be reserved for ‘an extreme case of national security.’
08.30.01
Related
Leave reporters' telephone records alone
First Amendment Outrage When government big-foots journalists’ newsgathering, it tramples public's right to know.
08.31.01
Senator shelves classified-leaks bill — for now
Although Richard Shelby says he’s confident Bush wouldn’t veto measure, he won't push to reschedule hearing before next year.
09.06.01
