No Suprises

Apian to protect privacy

When the Stanford University Daily went to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1977 to challenge a surprise police raid of its newsroom, the Carter Administration supported the local police. A Justice Department brief argued that the First Amendment did not protect a newspaper from unannounced searches, even if the paper's reporters were not suspected of any wrongdoing. By a 5-to-3 vote, the high court agreed in a decision that outraged editors and publishers.

Last week, a somewhat chastened Administration asked Congress in effect to overturn the Stanford Daily decision. Saying that the ruling "poses dangers to the effective functioning of our free press," President Carter submitted a bill that would impose a virtual ban on police searches and seizures of a reporter's "work product," which means his notes, drafts, tapes and film. The bill would protect not only journalists but scholars and authors--anyone involved in disseminating information to the public. The ban permits two exceptions: police can still make surprise searches for material held by someone who is suspected of having committed a crime and in certain "life-endangering situations," like kidnapings. Otherwise, needed information would have to be sought by subpoena.

What changed the Administration's mind? Said Assistant Attorney General Philip Heymann: "To be frank, we can live without the powers we are giving up; states and localities can live without them also." Heymann also conceded that the Administration does "recognize the legitimacy of the argument of the press" in the wake of the Stanford Daily case.

Carter's "First Amendment Privacy Protection Act" was part of a larger package of bills proposed or promised last week to protect the privacy of individuals. Individuals would be able to see, and copy, reports about their credit and their character that banks, insurance and loan companies regularly share with each other. Carter also urged new privacy safeguards on the more than 4 billion records on individuals (an average of 18 for each U.S. citizen) now held by the Federal Government, and asked Congress to restrict disclosure of the large assortment of information being stored by the new Electronic Funds Transfer systems. Such computer systems enable consumers to do everything from buying groceries to renting cars without even signing a check. But they can also be used to profile an individual's tastes and habits, and even track his whereabouts. Computers contribute to convenience, Carter noted, but they confront us with "threats to privacy undreamed of 200 years ago."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.